NASA Reference Publication 1024
N79_11734
Anthropometric Source Book
Volume I: Anthropometry for Designers
>
Edited by
Stajf of Anthropology Research Project
Webb Associates
Yellow Springs, Ohio
rVIASA
National Aeronautics
and Space Administration
- . „.. REPRODUCED BY
Scientific and Technical NATIONAL TECHNICAL
tnlormation Office INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE
1978 SPRlNGflElO, VA. 22161
N79-11734
Part 1 of 2
ANTHROPOMETRIC SOURCE BOOK - VOLUME I
ANTHROPOMETRY FOR DESIGNERS
Webb Associates
Yellow Springs, OH
Jul 71
1^
f ■ .
, / ■
/y/V-y-//
1. Repori No.
NASA RP-1024
2. Government Accession No.
4. Title and Subtitle . , . _ „ ,
An Chro pome trie Source Book
Volume I: Anthropometry for Designers
Volume II: A Handbook of Anthropometric Data
Volume III: Annotated Bibliography of Anthropometry
5. Report L/ate
July 1978
6. PeHorming Organization Code
7. Author(s)
Compiled and Edited by Staff of Anthropology Research Project
8. Performing Organization Reoort He
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Webb Associates
Yellow Springs, Ohio A5387
10. Work Unit No.
199-53-00-00-72
1 1 Contract or Grant No
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
Houston, Texas 77058
13. Type of Retxirt and Period Covered
Reference Publication
14 Sponsoring Ager^y Code
15. Supplennentary Notes
As an aid to the reader, where necessary the original units o
to the equivalent value in the Sysc6me International d'Unitls
written first, and original units are written parenthetically
pressure unit used, nun Hg, has not been supplemented with an
universal usage in the biomedical field.
f measure have been converted
(SI). The SI units are
thereafter. The physiological
SI equivalent because of its
16. AbnrMt
This three-volume publication brings together a large mass of anthropometric data which
define the physical size, mass distribution properties, and dynamic capabilities of U.S. and
selected foreign adult populations. Aimed specifically to meet the needs of design engi-
neers engaged in the design and execution of clothing, equipment, and workspaces for the
NASA Space Shuttle Program, the book is also designed to be of use to human engineers in a
wide variety of fields. It is not only a comprehensive source of specific anthropometric
information but also a guide to the effective applications of such data. Subjects covered
in Volume I include physical changes in the zero-g environment, variability in body size,
mass distribution properties of the human body, arm and leg reach, joint motion, strength,
sizing and design of clothing and workspaces, and statistical guidelines. Material pre-
sented includes such unpublished anthropometric data measured under one-g and zero-g condi-
tions. Also included are 1985 body size projections and actual cutouts of quarter-scnle
two-dimensional manikins for use by designers.
Volume 11 contains data resulting from surveys of 61 military and civilian populations
of both sexes from the U.S., Europe, and Asia. Some 295 measured variables are defined and
illustrated.
Volume III is an annotated bibliography covering a broad spectriim of topics relevant to
applied physical anthropology with emphasis on anthropometry and its applications in sizing
and design.
17. Key Words (Suggested by Author(sn
Height
Postura
Survey**.
Exercise
Body Size
Variations
Body Weight
Biomechanics
Anthropometry
Weightlessness
Body Measurement
Body Composition
Spacecraft Design
Muscular St^ '■''
Space Flight Feeding
Statistical Analysis
Gravitational Effects
Dimensional Measurement
Equipment Specifications
Human Factors Engineering
18 Distribution Statemfnl
STAR Subject Category:
5i (Man/System Tech-
nology and Lite Support)
19. Security Oassil lof this reporti
Unclassified
11 Pages
- 613
'For &ale by The National Technical information Service. Spnngfieid. Vtrtjinia 22161
ORIGINAL PAQE !S
OF POOR QUALITY
E
£,E = -5.e
E ;^
<M <S4 <><
= -S-E
oj oj a>
3 3 b_
S S^ fo
— • <VJ ^' fc/N
O ^^ O rJ
e 1^ « o
;= o) £ o
= "S ^ cr
a> e — —
w O) V 2^
3 3 3 ■§
S^ S" ST £
bfl I/) ^
E -
•^ z t,
_ ^ -.- ^'Ti -P
(fl — ^ .O
3 T) 3 3
■— ^ l/N ^-
— k« l/t
■ 3 3
; E E
— 5
;;;^
V*
£2
ez
02
,,.,.,..., M.,,
iiiihiii iiiiliiii
M'l'i'i'iM'r
L\
91
iiiiir iiiiliJiiiiLiM mil
lllMllllllIM
I'I'I'I'I
i\
n
mm
iiiiiiii
ri'i'i'i'i'i
i \z
MiiliiiiiiiMiiimiiiliiiiliiiiliiii
•ITI'I'I'IT
rri'iTiT
I'l'i'i'l'i'l'
E
S £ C •"
x: := <u E
-C „ -o a>
;=! a* ^ =
tt» ^ p
.£ = ■5:1
a> w <u <u
3 3 3 3'
CT O- CT O-
^ 1/1 kn </^ .
ir\ O oo ^ •
•£> ^ ^ CM (
oj O) oj a>
fQ ^ rQ rQ
^ rvj '^ *M
d .*£ v--
EEE EE
— — — O) O)
E E E = H ■
— 3 3 I—
^T r»- iTV O •O
CM ^T O' OO O f»-
^i^lr^^CZ>C3^^-'-lOO
i §■'
^ ^ o := ::;
3 TO 3 3
— — — o a, o- CT' I
.^±=>^ o o-o^cn-
a- E
H
FOREWORD
The quality of the interface which connects man with his machines
frequently determines the ability and ultimate performance of the man/machine
unit. The more dependent man is upon his creations the more critical is the
connecting link and nowhere has he been more absolutely dependent upon the
man/machine interface than in space flight. For every second of existence in
space, for every moment of comfort, for every endeavor, man is completely de-
pendent upon devices of his own making. The interfaces — whether they be space
suits or rocket controls and displays — are crucial.
As might have been expected, putting man into space systems has been
one of the most expensive and perplexing aspects of spacecraft design. The
human body has evolved under, and in response to, the large and ever-present
forces of gravity. It is not surprising, then, that when such a body is
placed in a weightless environment it frequently finds itself at a distinct
disadvantage. Man does, of course, adapt to weightlessness. Some aspects of
this adaptation are apparently harmless while others could be incapacitating
during and after return to one-g. Thus, in addition to helping the human body
in zero-g maintain its mechanical one-g functions, space systems must accom-
modate changes in the body's size, shape and posture.
The beginning of any man/machine interface is objective knowledge of
the full range of man's size, shape, composition and mechanical capacities.
Hence, anthropometry is fundamental to successful designs for the future use
and exploration of space. The only alternative is the costly process of trial
and error.
At this writing we are in the process of designing a space vehicle
which will carry large numbers of people, men and women of all nations and
races and of a wide range of ages and sizes, into and out of weightlessness.
It is inevitable that such a transportation system will be followed by space
stations where people will function for long periods in an environment for
which their bodies were not designed.
Fortunately, there is a great mass of anthropometric data available on
sizeable samples of the world's populations. The first task, then, was
collecting, standardizing and presenting sufficient data on the size, shape
and mass of samples of the world's populations Co give the designer primary
information for accommodation of the subjects who will use the shuttle and
other vehicles. Contained in this book also is a body of information on
strength, reach, range of joint motion and mass distribution properties of
the human body which are essential to the design of clothing, equipment and
workspaces for use in space vehicles.
—P receding p a g e Jtoi^
It is not enough, of course, to assemble information. Crucial to the
effective use of anthropometric data is an understanding of their origin,
limitations and proper application. To this end, chapters on variability of
body size, statistical considerations and the application of anthropometry to
sizing and design provide additional explanation and instruction to guide the
reader in making meaningful use of the data contained in this book.
Central to the concerns of NASA design engineers is the problem of
weightlessness. Unfortunately, in spite of 16 years of space flight, hard
data on the changes which take place in man's size, shape and function in the
zero-g environment are scanty. Interface problems are legion. A suit of
clothing will hardly accommodate 10-centimeter changes in girth or
6-centimeter height changes, yet men undergoing such changes have had to op-
erate in closely fitting space suits. A good look at the relaxed posture
assumed by man in the weightless environment will suggest why the
conventional seat is not only uncomfortable but also requires forceful
strapping if a person is to even stay in it. If weightless anthropometric
data are scanty and incomplete, they are nevertheless already sufficient to
have redirected much of the space medical effort and to explain many of the
phenomena described by crewmen which could seriously impede efficient
operation unless dealt with. The opening chapter of this volume contains
virtually all of what we now know about this subject. It is hoped that the
very paucity of data will challenge future investigators to give this field
proper attention.
Finally, those of us who are directly involved in space flight opera-
tions are grateful for the dedication of the man/machine engineers who make
our lot better. We in turn shall make every effort to help them by bringing
back the information they need to help us.
William E. Thornton, M.D.
Scientist Astronaut
1.V
PREFACE
The Anthropometric Source Book is designed to provide NASA, NASA
contractors, the aerospace industry. Government agencies, and a wide variety
of industrial users in the civilian sector with a comprehensive, up-to-date
tabulation of anthropometric data. Specifically, it is tailored to meet the
needs of engineers engaged in the design of equipment, habitability areas,
workspace layouts, life-support hardware, and clothing for the NASA Space
Shuttle/Spacelab program. The intent is to provide the designer not only
with dimensional data but with underlying anthropometric concepts and their
application to design.
All available anthropometric data collected in the weightless
environment are documented in this three-volume book, which also includes an
extensive tabulation of anthropometric data defining the physical size, mass
distribution properties, and dynamic capabilities of U.S. and selected
foreign populations. The material covers adult males and females of various
age groups, socio-educational backgrounds, races, and ethnic backgrounds.
Also included are size-range projections for a 1985 population eligible for
manned space flight.
Volume I is a nine-chapter treatment covering all basic areas of
anthropometry and its applications to the design of clothing, equipment, and
workspaces .
Chapter 1, "Anthropometric Changes in Weightlessness," addresses the
effects on the human body that occur as a result of weightlessness. Such
topics as weight loss, height increases, neutral body posture, strength and
body composition, changes in trunk and limb girth, and loss of muscle mass
are discussed in detail. In addition to bringing together in a single source
the most comprehensive collection of data on anthropometric change in
weightlessness that exists in this country, this chapter calls attention to
the potential impact of weightlessness on man/machine design and suggests
areas of future study essential to the proper design of man's space
environment .
Chapter 2, "Variability in Human Body Size," describes and graphically
documents the range of human-body variability found among homogeneous groups.
Those trends that show significantly marked differences between sexes and
among a number of racial/ethnic groups are also presented. This chapter
alerts design engineers to the nature and extent of human-body variability
and serves as a guide for modifying and designing man/machine systems.
Chapter 3, "Anthropometry," presents tabulated dimensional anthro-
pometric data on 59 variables for 12 selected populations. The variables
chosen were judged most relevant to current manned space programs. Appendix
A to this chapter is a glossary of anatomical and anthropometric terms.
Appendix B covers selected body dimensions of males and females from the
potential astronaut population projected to the 1980-1990 time frame. Appen-
dix C contains a 5th-, 50th-, and 95th-percentile drawing-board manikin based
on the anticipated 1980-1990 body-size distribution of USAF fliers.
k
Chapter 4, "The Inertial Properties of the Body and Its Segments," is a
user-oriented summary of the current state of knowlege on the mass distribu-
tion properties of the adult human body. The data presented lend themselves
to mathematical modeling.
Chapter 5, "Arm-Leg Reach and Workspace Layout," is an informative
chapter on functional reach measurements relevant to the design and layout of
workspaces. Basic reach data are given, along with recommendations for
applying corrective factors to adjust for differences in (1) workspace, task,
and body position; (2) environmental conditions - primarily gravity forces;
and (3) anthropometric characteristics of various populations.
Chapter 6, "Range of Joint Motion," discusses (1) selected reviews of
the range-of- joint-motion literature; (2) techniques for measuring range of
joint motion; (3) range-of- joint-motion terminology; (4) recommended range-
of-joint-motion data for the design engineer; (5) differences in the range of
joint motion due to the effects of age, sex, and protective clothing; and
(6) the range of joint motion of selected two-joint muscles. Together,
chapters 5 and 6 constitute a comprehensive data base and guide to
workstation layout.
Chapter 7, "Human Muscular Strength," deals with (1) a general review of
human muscular strength, (2) specificity of muscular strength, (3) relation-
ships between static and dynamic muscular strength, (4) strength within the
arm reach envelope of the seated subject, and (5) comparative muscular
strength of men and women. This chapter should aid design engineers in
relating strength data to workspace design.
Chapter 8, "Anthropometry in Sizing and Design," discusses the applica-
tion of human body-size diversity and quantification to engineering design.
Procedures are outlined for using anthropometric data in the development of
effective sizing programs.
Chapter 9, "Statistical Considerations in Man/Machine Design," reviews
statistical concepts that appear repeatedly in the NASA Anthropometric Source
Book and touches on some statistical problems that will typically confront
individuals using the data.
Volume I was compiled and edited by the following members of the
Anthropology Research Project of Webb Associates, Yellow Springs, Ohio:
Edmund Churchill, Lloyd L. Laubach, John T. McConville, and Use Tebbetts.
Volume II summarizes the results from anthropometric surveys of 61
military and civilian populations of both sexes from the United States,
Europe, and Asia. Some 295 measured variables are defined and illustrated.
The variable names are listed in alphabetical order. For each variable,
there is a computer order number by which it is identified, a list of surveys
in which it was measured, a group of summary statistics, and a series of
values for the 1st, 5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, 95th, and 99th
percentile of the given population.
VI
Preceding the presentation of the actual data are three indexes designed
to assist the reader in the use of the material. The first of these indexes,
entitled "Anthropometric Surveys: A Reference List," lists and describes the
sources from which all the summary data in this volume were extracted. This
enables the user to obtain additional information on any survey population if
that is desired. The next index, entitled "Definition of Measurements," in-
cludes both written descriptions of all the variables cited and simplified
line drawings, where feasible, to illustrate a particular measurement. The
third index is provided to further guide the user in identifying and finding
measurements relevant to his or her particular needs. It is entitled "Index
of Dimensions." The variables are listed by name and are categorized by ana-
tomical region and by anthropometric technique.
Volume II contains a minimum of text-type material and is primarily a
handbook of tabulated dimensional anthropometric data. It is probably the
most comprehensive source of summarized body-size data currently in
existence.
Volume II was compiled and edited by the following members of the
Anthropology Research Project of Webb Associates, Yellow Springs, Ohio:
Edmund Churchill, Thomas Churchill, Kay Downing, Peggy Erskine, Lloyd L.
Laubach, and John T. McConville.
Volume III lists 236 annotated references related to the field of
anthropometry. Included are references to every anthropometric survey
outlined in volume II, as well as a variety of other works on static and
working anthropometry of U.S. and foreign populations, anthropometry of
parts of the body related to the design of specific items such as gloves or
helmets, joint range and arm reach, mass distribution properties of the body,
strength data of various kinds, sizing systems, material on zero gravity, and
some general reference works. The references listed were selected by the
editors and contributors to volume I. Their objective was to reference those
studies, reports, textbooks, and surveys that they deemed most related to
their specific subject area and that would be most helpful to the user.
Volume III was compiled and edited by the following members of the
Anthropology Research Project of Webb Associates, Yellow Springs, Ohio:
Lloyd L. Laubach, John T. McConville, and Use Tebbetts.
John T. Jackson
Spacecraft Design Division
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
vii
CONTENTS
Chapter
Page
II
III
ANTHROPOMETRIC CHANGES IN WEIGHTLESSNESS,
Thornton
Weight Changes
Height Changes
Posture
Shape and Center of Mass
Strength and Body Composition . . . .
Future
References
Additional Data Sources
William E.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Weight Changes of Space-Flight Crewmen- . . .
Height Measurements of Skylab 4 Crewmen . . .
Truncal, Neck, and Limb Girth Measurements of
U.S. Space-Flight Crewmen
VARIABILITY IN HUMAN BODY SIZE, James F. Annis,
Intra-individual Variations in Size
Inter-individual Variations in Size
Secular Changes in Adult Body Size
Summary
References
ANTHROPOMETRY, John T. McConville and Lloyd L. Laubach. . .
Measurement Techniques
The Data
References
Appendix A: A Glossary of Anatomical and Anthropometric
Terms
Appendix B: Projected 1985 Body Size Data
Appendix C: Drawing Board Manikins
IV THE INERTIAL PROPERTIES OF THE BODY AND ITS
SEGMENTS, Herbert M. Reynolds
The Body Linkage System
Segment Weight
Moments of Inertia
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
The Anatomical Framework
Regression Equations
Conversion Table of Moments of Inertia.
X
I-l
1-4
I-IO
1-19
1-26
1-43
1-58
1-60
1-61
1-62
1-76
1-82
II-l*^
II-7
11-25
11-38
11-57
11-59
III-l*^
III-3
III-6
III-68
III-70
III-83
III-98
/
IV-1 '
IV-6
IV-31
IV-39
IV-55
IV-60
IV-6 7
IV-75
nmM page blank
IX
PREGiCWNG PAGE BLANK HOI F>LMED
CONTENTS (concluded)
apter Page
V ARM-LEG REACH AND WORKSPACE LAYOUT, Howard W. Stoudt. ..... V-1 "■
Review of Existing Data on Functional Reach Measurements . . V-2
Workspace Design as Based on Functional Reach Measurements . V-6
Biological Factors Affecting Functional Reaches V-8
Environmental Factors Affecting Functional Reaches V-12
The Data: Functional Reach Measurements V-17
Conversion Techniques for Different Workspace Conditions . . V-19
Zero Gravity Conditions — Unrestrained or Partially
Restrained Body Movement V-59
Conversion Techniques for Different Populations V-60
References V-64
«/
VI RANGE OF JOINT MOTION, Lloyd L. Laubach VI-
Selected Review of the Literature VI-1
Techniques for Measuring Range of Joint Motion VI-2
Range of Joint Motion Terminology VI-3
Recommended Range of Joint Motion Data for the Design
Engineer VI-4
Variations in Range of Joint Motion Measurements VI-7
Range of Motion of Two- Joint Muscles VI-9
Summary VI-1 7
References VI-18
VII HUMAN MUSCULAR STRENGTH, Lloyd L. Laubach VII-1 ^
Specificity of Muscular Strength VII-1
Static vs. Dynamic Muscular Strength VII-2
^Human Force Exertions Within the Arm Reach Envelope of the
Seated Subject VII-8
Comparative Muscular Strength of Men and Women VII-1 1
References VII-52
VIII ANTHROPOMETRY IN SIZING AND DESIGN, John T. McConville .... VIII-1 ^
Clothing and Personal Protective Equipment VIII-7
Work Station Design VIII-15
References VIII-21
IX STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MAN-MACHINE DESIGNS, /
Edmund Churchill IX-1 ^
The Basic Statistical Measures: One Variable at a Time. . . IX-2
The Interrelationship Among Anthropometric Measures IX-19
A Mathematical Model for Body Size Data IX-38
The Monte Carlo Method IX-59
References IX-62
TABLES
Page
CHAPTER I.
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Appendix A
Table A-1
Table A-2
Table A-3
Appendix B
Table B-1
Table B-2
Table B-3
Appendix C
Table C-1
ANTHROPOMETRIC CHANGES IN WEIGHTLESSNESS
Anthropometric changes in weightlessness 1-2
Comparison of height changes in crevnnen of SL-4 and
ASTP 1-13
Changes in height in one g; standing after reclining
and standing after normal sleep period 1-16
Leg-volume measurements of SL-4 crewmen
(a) CDR 1-32
(b) SPT 1-33
(c) PLT 1-34
Postflight changes in circumference found in U.S.S.R.
cosmonauts 1-37
Changes in arm and leg volume and waist girth of
Skylab crewmen 1-38
Grip strength measurements of Skylab crewmen 1-47
Summary of Skylab crew averages of exercise-related
data 1-54
Some average changes in muscle parameters 1-54
Left-leg volume changes of ASTP crewmen 1-56
Changes in lean body mass on Skylab missions
(a) By crewman 1-57
(b) By mission 1-57
. Anthropometric weight changes of U.S. astronauts. . . . 1-63
Weight changes of U.S.S.R cosmonauts 1-66
Daily body weights of Skylab crewman
(a) SL-2 1-67
(b) SL-3 1-69
(c) SL-4 1-72
Height and change-in-height measurements of SL-4 CDR
(a) Preflight measurements 1-77
(b) In-flight measurements 1-77
(c) Postflight measurements 1-78
Height and change-in-height measurements of SL-4 SPT
(a) Preflight measurements 1-78
(b) In-flight measurements 1-79
(b) Postflight measurements 1-79
Height and change-in-height measurements of SL-4 PLT
(a) Preflight measurements 1-80
(b) In-flight measurements 1-80
(c) Postflight measurements ... 1-81
Truncal, neck, and arm girth measurements of SL-3
crewmen
(a) CDR 1-83
(b) SPT 1-84
(c) PLT 1-85
k
TABLES (continued)
Ch. I. (continued)
Table C-2. Truncal and neck girth measurements of SL-4 CDR
(a
(b
(c
Table C-3. Leg measurements of SL-4 CDR
(a
(b
(c
(d
Table C-4. Leg measurements of SL-4 SPT
(a
(b
(c
(d
CDR.
SPT.
PLT.
Preflight. . ,
In-flight. . .
Postflight, R
Postflight, R
to R
to R
4 .
68.
Preflight. . ,
In-flight. .
Postflight, R
Postflight, R
to
to
4 .
68.
Table C-5. Leg measurements of SL-4 PLT
(a) Preflight. ...
(b) In-flight
(c) Postflight, R+OtoR+4
(d) Postflight, R + 5 to R + 68
Table C-6. Calf-circumference and lower- limb-volume data
for individual Apollo crewmembers in a resting,
supine position
Table C-7 . Upper-limb volumes and changes in volume of
Skylab crewmen
(a) SL-2
(b) SL-3
(c) SL-4 . .
CHAPTER II. VARIABILITY IN HUMAN BODY SIZE
Table 1. Stature, weight, and stature: weight ratio among inha-
bitants of different parts of the world (Dobzhansky,
1962, after Black)
Table 2. Average body changes which occur with aging (based on
Gsell, 1967)
Table 3. Dimensional differences at several percentile levels
between USAF pilots aged 20-30 years and USAF pilots
aged 30-40+ years (based on Fry and Churchill, 1956) .
Table 4. Changes in body girths of young men with semi-
starvation (based on Brozek et al . , 1957)
Table 5. Differences between right side and left side measure-
ments of selected dimensions (based on Laubach and
McConville, 1967)
Table 6. Right side-left side dimensional differences in women
in erect and relaxed postures (based on Peters, 1969).
Table 7. Differences (A) between mean relaxed (X^) and mean
flexed (Xf) biceps and elbow circumference for
selected military populations
Page
1-86
1-86
1-87
1-88
1-89
1-90
1-91
1-92
1-93
1-94
1-95
1-96
1-97
1-98
1-99
I-lOO
I-lOl
1-102
1-103
II-6
II-7
II-9
II-IO
II-ll
11-12
11-15
xn
TABLES (continued)
Page
Ch. II. (continued)
Table 8. Linear distance changes over body joints with movement
(based on Emanuel and Barter, 1957) 11-16
Table 9. Increase in dimensions from clothing (based on Clauser
and Hertzberg, 1964) 11-19
Table 10. Increase in dimensions from pressure suit (based on
Clauser and Hertzberg, 1964) 11-21
Table 11. Comparison of males and females for selected dimensions
- 5th and 95th percentile values (from 1967 USAF
survey unpublished and Clauser et al . , 1972) 11-27
Table 12. Selected dimensions of males and females in the U.S.
population (based on Stoudt et al . , 1965) 11-28
Table 13. Racial/ethnic origins of U.S. population (from
Census Bureau Data, April 1970) 11-31
Table 14. Height and weight of U.S. military males with devia-
tions of the racial/ethnic subgroups from the total
sample mean and standard deviation (from U.S. Army
survey, 1966) 11-33
Table 15. Means and standard deviations of selected dimensions
for young military males of three racial groups (based
on Long and Churchill, 1965, and Yokohori, 1972) .... 11-34
Table 16. Means and standard deviations of selected dimensions
for young females of three racial groups (based on
Clauser et al , 1972) 11-35
Table 17. Selected dimensions of different vocational-professional
groups of U.S. males 11-50
Table 18. Selected dimensions of different vocational-professional
groups of U.S. females 11-51
Table 19. Mean stature, weight and age of U.S. Army soldiers . . . 11-53
Table 20. Average values for selected body measurements of U.S.
females born 1903 to 1933 11-53
CHAPTER III. ANTHROPOMETRY
Table 1. A summary of the anthropometrical data available for
twelve sample populations III-2
Table 2. Comparison of UK and USAF measuring technique II1-5
CHAPTER IV. THE INERTIAL PROPERTIES OF THE BODY AND ITS SEGMENTS
Table 1. Regression equations for estimating limb lengths .... IV-12
Table 2. Bone length values estimated for 1985 populations . . . IV-13
Table 3. Ratios of link length to bone length IV-13
Table 4. Link length values estimated for 1985 population .... IV-14
Table 5. Values computed from Snyder et al . (1972) data
demonstrating possible source of zero-gravity torso
"growth" IV-20
Table 6. Summary of maximum displacement of center of gravity
for various body positions described by Swearingen
(1962) IV-24
Xlll
k
TABLES (continued)
Page
Ch. IV. (continued)
Table 7. Location of center of gravity based on Santschi et al .
(1963) IV-26
Table 8. Location of center of gravity based on DuBois et al .
(1964) IV-28
Table 9. Location of center of gravity based on Ignazi et al.
(1972) IV-29
Table 10. Comparison of Chandler et al. (1975) and Santschi et
al. (1963) location of center of gravity for the whole
body in subjects matched on basis of height and weight. IV-30
Table 11. Location of the center of mass IV-32
Table 12. Location of body segments' center of mass IV-33
Table 13. Prediction equations to estimate segment weight based
on reanalysis of cadaver data IV-34
Table 14. Segmental weight/body weight ratios from cadaver
studies IV-35
Table 15. Percentage distribution of total body weight according
to different segmentation plans IV-36
Table 16. Segment weight design values derived from regression
equations in Table 13 IV-37
Table 17. Male segment volume as percent of total body volume . . IV-38
Table 18. Female segment volume as percent of total body volume . IV-39
Table 19. Segment density for male cadavers IV-40
Table 20. Means, standard deviations, and regression equations
for whole body moments of inertia from Santschi et
al. (1963) IV-42
Table 21. Whole body moments of inertia for male whites computed
from Table 20 IV-43
Table 22. Means, standard deviations, and regression equations
for whole body moments of inertia from DuBois et al .
(1964) IV-45
Table 23. Whole body moments of inertia for male whites computed
from Table 22 IV-46
Table 24. Means, standard deviations, and regression equations
for whole body moments of inertia from Ignazi et al .
(1972) IV-47
Table 25. Principal moments of inertia from Chandler et al .
(1975) IV-49
Table 26. Comparison of moments of inertia between Chandler et
al. (1975) and Santschi et al. (1963) ......... IV-50
Table 27. Segment moments of inertia (10^ gm-cm^) through the
center of mass IV-51
Table 28. The radius of gyration (K) as a percent of segment
length IV-52
Table 29. Segment moments of inertia as computed from the
coefficients in Table 28 IV-53
xiv
TABLES (continued)
Ch. IV. (continued) Page
Appendix B
Table 1. Regression equations for estimating link lengths
directly from anthropometric measures of bone lengths
from Dempster, Sherr and Priest (1964) IV-69
Table 2. Regression equations to estimate center of mass of
body segments from Clauser et al. (1969) IV-70
Table 3. Regression equations for estimating segment weights
from Clauser, McConville and Young (1969) IV-72
Table 4. Regression equations to estimate segment volume from
Clauser, et al. (1969) IV-73
Table 5. Regression equations for predicting principal moments
of inertia (gm-cm^) from Chandler et al. (1975) .... IV-74
Appendix C
Table 1. Conversion table of moments of inertia IV-76
CHAPTER V. ARM-LEG REACH AND WORKSPACE LAYOUT
Table 1. Anthropometric dimensions of the male and female sub-
jects utilized in the functional arm reach studies. .
Tables 2-11 Men's right hand grasping reach to a horizontal plane
2. through the seat reference point
3. 12.5 centimeters (5 in.) above seat reference point .
4. 25.4 centimeters (10 in.) above seat reference point.
5. 38,1 centimeters (15 in.) above seat reference point.
6. 50.8 centimeters (20 in.) above seat reference point.
7. 63.5 centimeters (25 in.) above seat reference point.
8. 76.2 centimeters (30 in.) above seat reference point.
9. 88.9 centimeters (35 in.) above seat reference point.
10. 101.6 centimeters (40 in.) above seat reference point
11. 114.3 centimeters (45 in.) above seat reference point
Tables 12-19 Women's right hand grasping reach to a horizontal
plane:
12. through the seat reference point
13. 15.2 centimeters (6 in.) above seat reference point
14. 30.5 centimeters (12 in.) above seat reference point
15. 45 centimeters (18 in.) above seat reference point.
16. 61 centimeters (24 in.) above seat reference point.
17. 76.2 centimeters (30 in.) above seat reference point
18. 91.4 centimeters (36 in.) above seat reference point
19. 106.7 centimeters (42 in.) above seat reference point
Table 20. Approximate changes in arm reaches in Tables 2-19 as a
function of variation in seat backrest angle
V-20
V-22
V-24
V-26
V-28
V-30
V-32
V-34
V-36
V-38
V-40
V-42
V-44
V-46
V-48
V-50
V-52
V-54
V-56
V-61
CHAPTER VI. RANGE OF JOINT MOTION
Table 1. Range of male joint motion values (Barter, Emanuel
and Truett, 1957)
Table 2. Range of female joint motion values (Harris and
Harris, 1968)
Table 3. Difference in range of joint motion between men and
women (based on Sinelkinoff and Grigorowitsch, 1931)
VI-5
VI-6
VI-7
XV
i
TABLES (continued)
Page
Ch. VI. (continued)
Table 4. Mean percentage loss of diver flexibility caused by
two diving suits (based on Bachrach et al . , 1975) . . . VI-9
Table 5. Range of motion of two- joint muscles VI-15
CHAPTER VII. HUMAN MUSCULAR STRENGTH
Table 1. Static and dynamic strength of knee flexors VII-5
Table 2. Correlations between static and dynamic elbow flexion
performance VII-7
Table 3. A selected suninary table of reported relationships
between static and dynamic strength VII-7
Table 4. 13° seat back angle — location of the handle assembly
in relation to seat reference point and seat center-
line VII-12
Table 5. 25° seat back angle — location of the handle assembly
in relation to seat reference point and seat center-
line ..... VII-13
Table 6. 65° seat back angle — location of the handle assembly
in relation to seat reference point and seat center-
line VII-14
CHAPTER VIII. ANTHROPOMETRY IN SIZING AND DESIGN
Table 1. "The average man" VIII-2
Table 2. 95th percentiles — AFW height segments VIII-5
Table 3. Eight-size height-weight bivariate from Emanuel et al.
1959 VIII-12
Table 4. Eight-size height-weight program VIII-11
CHAPTER IX. STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MAN-MACHINE DESIGNS
Table 1. An excerpt from Volume II: the major univariate
statistics IX-3
Table 2. Approximate proportions of data falling into intervals
based on mean +K standard deviations IX-10
Table 3. Coefficients of variation by measurement type IX-12
Table 4. Frequency table for U.S. Navy pilots' statures IX-17
Table 5. Percentile-standard deviation relationships IX-18
Table 6. Cost of accommodating additional percentages of a user
population in mid-range units IX-20
Table 7. Selected correlation coefficients for USAF Fliers
and Air Force Women IX-27
Table 8. Distribution of correlation coefficients by variables,
groups of variables and entire group (from Anthropo -
metry of Air Force Women by Clauser et al. , 1972) T . . IX-34
Table 9. Typical standard errors IX-52
Table 10. Selected statistics for stature and floor-to-waist
and waist-to-vertex heights (AFW '68 data) IX-55
Table 11. Fifth percentiles, means and ninety-fifth percentiles
for stature segments (based on Clauser et al., 1968). . IX-56
xvi
TABLES (concluded)
Page
Ch. IX. (continued)
Table 12. Distribution of weights of five-man crews IX-60
Table 13. Distribution of maximum statures of five-man crews. . . IX-60
xvii
i
FIGURES
Page
CHAPTER I. ANTHROPOMETRIC CHANGES IN WEIGHTLESSNESS
Figure 1. Typical loss of body weight during weightlessness . . . 1-4
Figure 2. Weight loss as a function of mission and duration . . , 1-5
Figure 3. Changes in body mass of SL-2 crewmen 1-7
Figure 4. Changes in body mass of SL-3 crewmen 1-7
Figure 5. Changes in body mass of SL-4 crewmen 1-8
Figure 6. Average weight loss as a function of average energy
intake of Skylab crewmen 1-9
Figure 7. Typical curve of height changes on exposure to
weightlessness I-IO
Figure 8. Graph of mean in-flight SL-4 height measurements . . . 1-12
Figure 9. An illustration of change in height in one g over an
8- to 14-hour period after a normal 8-hour sleep
period 1-15
Figure 10. First-order mechanical analog consistent with changes
in axial mechanical loading and unloading 1-17
Figure 11. An SL-4 crewman in a relaxed, unrestrained posture
in weightlessness
(a) Front view 1-19
(b) Side view 1-19
Figure 12. The SL-3 PLT in a forced erect posture in
weightlessness 1-23
Figure 13. Side view of the SL-3 PLT in a forced erect posture in
weightlessness 1-23
Figure 14. A comparison of the changes in posture of the SL-4
SPT 1-23
Figure 15. A side-view comparison of the changes in posture of
the SL-4 SPT 1-23
Figure 16. The segment angles of the weightless neutral body
position 1-24
XVI 11
FIGURES (continued)
XIX
Page
Ch. I (continued)
Figure 17. The body position of the SL-3 PLT while loading film
in weightlessness 1-24
Figure 18. Photographs showing subject in a relaxed, neutral
buoyancy posture under water
(a) With unblocked vision 1-25
(b) With blocked vision 1-25
Figure 19. Anthropometric measurements made on the Skylab crewmen. 1-28
Figure 20. Truncal girth changes of SL-4 crewmen in an anatomical
position in weightlessness with one-g measurements as
a baseline 1-28
Figure 21. Changes in left-limb volumes of SL-4 crewmen in
flight 1-31
Figure 22. Left-leg volumes of ASTP crewmen calculated from
segmental girth measurements 1-35
Figure 23. Average postf light leg-volume changes on Skylab
missions 1-39
Figure 24. Measurements used in center-of-gravity and center-of-
mass determinations 1-40
Figure 25. Preflight (baseline) and postf light center-of-gravity
measurements of SL-4 PLT 1-40
Figure 26. A single transverse section of the body at shoulder
level generated by a computer from points derived from
stereophotogrammetry 1-41
Figure 27. A composite of transverse body sections made from
stereophotogrammetric plates 1-42
Figure 28. Stereophotogrammetric volume as a function of
longitudinal axis level of SL-3 CDR before and
after flight 1-43
Figure 29. Handgrip forces as a function of time in weightlessness
for Soyuz 9 crewmen
(a) Nikolayev 1-46
(b) Sevast'yanov 1-46
Figure 30. Arrangement used for Skylab postflight muscle function
test 1-48
Figure 31. Recording of right-leg muscle forces of the SL-3
backup PLT 1-48
Figure 32. A plot of peak arm forces of the SL-3 CDR from
preflight and postflight curves 1-48
i
FIGURES (continued)
Page
Ch. I (continued)
Figure 33. A plot of the changes in arm forces on SL-2 and SL-3. . 1-50
Figure 34. A plot of the changes in leg forces on SL-2 and SL-3. . 1-50
Figure 35. MK-I exerciser positions. 1-51
Figure 36. Skylab treadmill arrangement used to test muscle
function 1-52
Figure 37. A plot of the average arm strength changes on Skylab
missions 1-53
Figure 38. A plot of the average leg strength changes on Skylab
missions 1-53
Figure 39. Exercise-related quantities on Skylab missions 1-55
CHAPTER II. VARIABILITY IN HUMAN BODY SIZE
Figure 1. Body size comparisons of three principal racial
groups: males and females II-3
Figure 2. Incremental and percentage growth changes in body
size due to the effects of protective clothing and
equipment (based on Alexander, et al . , 1976) 11-20
Figure 3 . Incremental and percentage growth changes in body
size due to the effects of inflated pressure suits
(based on Alexander et al . , 1969) 11-22
Figure 4. Functional envelope dimensions of the fully suited
astronaut (based on NASA Habitability Data Hand-
book, 1971) 11-23
Figure 5. Recommended access corridor dimensions to accommo-
date fully suited astronaut (based on NASA Habita-
bility Data Handbook, 1971) 11-24
Figure 6. A comparison of 5th-95th percentile male and
female values for selected dimensions showing the
range of differences and overlap between the two
groups 11-29
Figure 7. Distribution of stature and weight for U.S. Air
Force personnel — male and female 11-30
Figure 8. Range of variation between males of three racial
groups for selected body dimensions (smallest 5th
to largest 95th percentile) 11-36
Figure 9 . Range of variation between females of three racial
groups for selected body dimensions (smallest 5th
to largest 95th percentile) 11-37
Figures 10-20 Range of variability (5th-95th percentile)
for selected populations in:
10. waist circumference 11-39
11. stature 11-40
12. weight 11-41
13. buttock-knee length 11-42
14. sleeve length 11-43
XX
FIGURES (continued)
Page
Ch. II (continued)
15. hip circumference 11-^4
16. biacromial breadth TI-45
17. trochanteric height 11-46
18. chest circumference 11-47
19. crotch height 11-48
20. sitting height 11-49
Figure 21. Secular increase in stature of young European and
Japanese males: 1840-1960. After: Udjus (1964), and
Harbeck (1960) 11-54
Figure 22. Secular trend in stature of young U.S. males:
1870-1980 11-56
CHAPTER III. ANTHROPOMETRY
Figure 1. Anthropometric instruments III-4
Appendix A
Figure 1. Anatomical planes and orientations III-78
Figure 2. Anatomical and anthropometric landmarks III-79
Figure 3. Anatomical and anthropometric landmarks III-80
Figure 4. Anthropometric landmarks of the head and face III-81
Figure 5. Anthropometric landmarks of the head and face III-82
Appendix C
Figure 1. USAF two-dimensional manikin III-99
Figure 2. USAF two-dimensional manikin in fetal position III-lOO
Figure 3. Two-dimensional 5%ile USAF manikin (simplified
version) III-104
Figure 4. Two-dimensional 50Zile USAF manikin (simplified
version) III-105
Figure 5. Two-dimensional 95%ile USAF manikin (simplified
version) III-106
CHAPTER IV. THE INERTIAL PROPERTIES OF THE BODY AND ITS SEGMENTS
Figure 1. Whole body axis system centered on the pelvis IV-5
Figure 2. Segmentation planes used in studies of cadavers (at
left) and living bodies (at right) IV-7
Figure 3. Linkage system IV-9
Figure 4. A computer model of body linkage - 50th percentile
1985 man with extended elbow IV-16
Figure 5. Internal anatomical landmarks of the torso for
body position depicted in Figure 4 IV-17
Figure 6. Computer model of body linkage: 50th percentile
1985 man in resting position IV-18
Figure 7. Internal anatomical landmarks of the torso for
body position depicted in Figure 6 IV-19
Figure 8. Weightless neutral body position IV-21
XX 1
FIGURES (continued)
Ch. IV (continued) Page
Figure 9. Centers of mass in eight body positions (from
Santschi et al., 1963) IV-25
Figure 10. Mean centers of gravity in nude and suited subjects
(from DuBois et al., 1964) IV-44
CHAPTER V. ARM-LEG REACH AND WORKSPACE LAYOUT
Figure 1. Spacelab workspaces (from Thompson, 1975) . , . , . V-9
Figure 2. Portable foot restraint positions (from Thompson,
1975) V-10
Figure 3. Foot restraint system (from Thompson, 1975) .... V-15
Figures 4-13 Men' s grasping reach to a horizontal plane:
4. through the seat reference point. ......... V-23
5. 5 inches above the seat reference point ...... V-25
6. 10 inches above the seat reference point V-27
7. 15 inches above the seat reference point V-29
8. 20 inches above the seat reference point V-31
9. 25 inches above the seat reference point V-33
10. 30 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-35
11. 35 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-37
12. 40 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-39
13. 45 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-41
Figures 14-21 Women' s grasping reach to a horizontal plane:
14. through the seat reference point. ......... V-43
15. 6 inches above the seat reference point V-45
16. 12 inches above the seat reference point V-47
17. 18 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-49
18. 24 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-51
19. 30 inches above the seat reference point V-53
20. 36 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-55
21. 42 inches above the seat reference point. ..... V-57
CHAPTER VI. RANGE OF JOINT MOTION
Figure 1. Two-joint muscle test apparatus ..... VI-12
Figure 2. Shoulder extension-flexion. ............ VI-12
Figure 3. Elbow flexion VI- 13
Figure 4. Ankle flexion Vl-13
Figure 5. Hip flexion VI- 14
Figure 6. Knee flexion. VI-14
CHAPTER VII. HUMAN MUSCULAR STRENGTH
Figure 1. Results of static and dynamic strength testing as
reported by Berger and Higginbotham, 1970 VII-6
Figure 2. Equipment for measurement of maximum static push
forces of seated subjects VII-9
XXll
FIGURES (continued)
Ch. VII (continued) Page
Figures 3-22 Force exerted on handle assembly at various
locations relative to the seat reference point
and seat centerline (values in kiloponds):
3. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 38 cm above
SRP VII-15
4. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 51 cm above
SRP VII- 16
5. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 64 cm above
SRP VII-17
6. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 76 cm above
SRP VII- 18
7. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 89 cm above
SRP VII- 19
8. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 102 cm above
SRP VII-20
9. 13 degree seat back angle — handle at 114 cm above
SRP VII-21
10. 13 degree seat back angle--handle at 127 cm above
SRP VII-22
11. 25 degree seat back angle--handle at 38 cm above
SRP VII-23
12. 25 degree seat back angle — handle at 51 cm above
SRP VII-24
13. 25 degree seat back angle--handle at 64 cm above
SRP VII-25
14. 25 degree seat back angle — handle at 76 cm above
SRP VII-26
15. 25 degree seat back angle--handle at 89 cm above
SRP VII-27
16. 25 degree seat back angle--handle at 102 cm above
SRP VII-28
17. 25 degree seat back angle--handle at 114 cm above
SRP VII-29
18. 65 degree seat back angle--handle at 38 cm above
SRP VII-30
19. 65 degree seat back angle — handle at 51 cm above
SRP VII-31
20. 65 degree seat back angle--handle at 64 cm above
SRP VII-32
21. 65 degree seat back angle--handle at 76 cm above
SRP VII-33
22. 65 degree seat back angle--handle at 89 cm above
SRP VII-34
Figures 23-33 Female/male strength comparison: upper extremities:
23. Backward and forward push with one hand ...... VII-36
24. Lateral push VII-36
25. Forward push with both hands VII-37
xxm
i
FIGURES (continued)
Page
Ch. VII (continued)
26. Horizontal pull and push VII-37
27. Vertical pull downwards and push upwards. VII-38
28. Hand volar flexion and dorsal extension VII-38
29. Neck flexion forwards and shoulder flexion VII-39
30. Handle pronation and supination VII-39
31. Elbow flexion and extension VII-40
32. Hand grip strength VII-40
33. Key pronation and supination .•.• ■ VII-41
Figures 34-38 Female/male strength comparison: lower extremities:
34. Hip flexion and extension VII-42
35. Hip abduction and adduction VII-42
36. Ankle plantar flexion and dorsiflexion VII-43
37. Knee flexion and extension VII-43
38. Leg extension VII-44
Figures 39-41 Female/male strength comparison: trunk
39. Trunk extension ..... .... VII-45
40. Trunk flexion VII-45
41 . Trunk bending VII-46
Figures 42-46 Female/male strength comparison: dynamic
42. Straight-arm carry VII-47
43. Lowering VII-47
44. Lifting VII-48
45. Bent-arm carry VII-48
46. Pushing and pulling VII-49
Figure 47. The range and average mean percentage differences
in muscle strength characteristics between women
and men VII-50
CHAPTER VIII. ANTHROPOMETRY IN SIZING AND DESIGN
Figure 1. Stature variability by percentile groups VIII-4
Figure 2. Weight variability by percentile groups VIII-4
CHAPTER IX. STATISTICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MAN-MACHINE DESIGNS
Figure 1. Distribution of stature measurements (AFW '68 data) . . IX-7
Figure 2. Areas under the normal curve IX-8
Figure 3. Measurement with an arbitrary zero value IX-13
Figure 4. Computation of percentiles IX-16
Figure 5. Cumulative frequencies — U.S. Navy Flyers '64
statures — on rectangular graph paper IX-21
Figure 6. Bivariate frequency tables illustrating interrela-
tionships of anthropometric data (from Clauser et
al., 1968) IX-22
Figure 7. Correlation coefficients and regression equations:
a few illustrative calculations IX-25
Figure 8. Regression bands: regression values +^1 SEy IX-31
xxiv
FIGURES (concluded)
Page
Ch. IX (continued)
Figure 9. Distribution of correlation coefficients (from
Clauser et al . , 1968) IX-35
Figure 10. Ninety-five percent probability ellipse for sitting
height and stature IX-41
Figure 11. Ninety-five percent probability ellipse for weight
and hip breadth IX-42
Figure 12. Artificial bivariate table for buttock-knee and
buttock-popliteal lengths (USAF '67 data) IX-44
Figure 13. Proportions disaccommodated six types of two-variable
design patterns IX-46
Figure 14 Design limits based on a specified percent disaccom-
modated: Type A design, eye height, sitting and
thumb-tip reach IX-49
XXV
N79-n 735
CHAPTER I
ANTHROPOMETRIC CHANGES IN WEIGHTLESSNESS
by
William Thornton, M.D., Scientist Astronaut
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Man's body has been shaped by the constant force of gravity for the ma-
jority of his existence, both as a species and as an individual. His muscles,
skeleton, and nervous and cardiovascular systems have all adapted to counter
this force. It is not surprising that marked changes occur in such a body
when forces of gravity are effectively removed, as in orbital flight.
Significant changes in posture, size, shape, fluid quantity, and fluid
distribution did occur during space flight (Thornton et al., 1977). Loss of
strength, muscle, and body mass and changes in body composition will also
occur in the absence of countermeasures (Thornton and Rummel, 1977). Such
changes are summarized in table 1.
In addition, man has become dependent upon gravity for many of his
actions. Virtually all of his furniture and many of his tools, appliances,
and workspace designs are dependent upon gravity's action, both on the de-
vices and on the man.
Placing the human body in such a changed force environment as
weightlessness generates a new area of anthropometric study and appli,cation
and provides a challenge to man/machine designers. The small amount of
anthropometric data available from space flight has already been sufficient
to indicate the major impact of such data on the design of apparatus for use
in space, as well as to redirect many efforts of life scientists. With a new
generation of spacecraft, equipment, and space systems now in progress, there
is an immediate need to allow for changes due to weightlessness in the ini-
tial stages of design. Such changes in the human body must be accommodated
if designs are to be efficient.
The primary purpose of this chapter is to document and explain, as fully
as possible, the anthropometric data currently available on the human body in
weightlessness. Although these data are far from complete and often lacking
in rigor, they are virtually all that are available. Where possible, explan-
ations of physiological mechanisms are included in an effort to provide as
much understanding as possible of the interaction of the body with this new
environment. A few comments on potential applications have been made. Other
chapters also address the application of this material and existing one-g
data to space-related problems. In many cases, imagination and creativity
will be required to combine existing techniques with these data for optimum
results .
I-l
i
TABLE 1.- ANTHROPOMETRIC CHANGES IN WEIGHTLESSNESS
Change
Time required for change to occur
May be progressive
Weight loss
Trunk and limb girth
Loss of muscle mass
and strength
Body composition
and density
Small initial loss first 1 to 2 days; final
course depends on diet, exercise, and other
factors.
Immediate in some areas; slow in others; de-
pends on diet, exercise, and other factors
Days to weeks; depends on diet, exercise, and
other factors
Days to weeks; depends on diet, exercise, and
other factors
Constant and persists throughout flight
Height increase
Posture
Fluid shifts
Center-of-mass shifts
2 phases: immediate step; then, hours to days
for slower component
Immediate
Hours to 1 or 2 days
Days
Some indications of changes caused by weightlessness can be gleaned from
anecdotal information supplied by astronauts; stuffy noses, low-back fatigue,
blood rushing to the head, the thin "bird legs of space," and suit-donning
difficulties all provide hints.
Specific anthropometric measurements made during the American space
program prior to Skylab consisted of pref light and postf light weight, a few
1-2
handgrip measurements, and stereophotogrammetric photographs taken on Apollo
16.^ Preflight and postflight measurements of leg circumferences and volumes
are available from other Apollo studies.^
On the Skylab 2 mission (SL-2), strength and fatigue measurements and
segmental girth measurements of upper and lower extremities were made before
and after flight.-^ Also, in-flight mass measurements (Thornton and Ord,
1977) and one set of in-flight facial photographs were obtained, and pre-
flight and postflight stereophotography and analysis^ were performed.
On SL-3, the aforementioned measurements were continued and a few body-
girth measurements added. Whole-body photographs of the crewmen in anatomi-
cal positions were made during flight.-'
On SL-4, the previously accumulated data were augmented by a set of
photographs illustrating free-floating posture. Measurements of segmental
limb girths, truncal girths, and heights were obtained throughout the flight
(Thornton et al., 1977).
On the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (AST?) mission, in-flight height and
leg-girth measurements were made."'' Followup one-g studies and analysis are
still in progress. Insofar as possible, all of these data are included here
and will be described.
In the Russian space program, anthropometric measurements, including
postflight strength and limb girths, were made as early as 1968 on Soyuz 4
(Kakurin, 1971). In-flight handgrip forces were measured on the Soyuz 9 and
11 flights; static muscle forces and limb girths were measured on Soyuz 9 and
probably on other flights. Preflight and postflight studies of walking were
made on Soyuz 9 to 12 (Parin et al., 1974). Additional studies were probably
performed. All Russian data available will be presented here.
Ip. Rambaut et al.: Nutritional Studies. Ch. 6 of Biomedical Results
of Apollo. NASA SP-368, 1975.
^W. Hoffler and R. Johnson: Apollo Flight Crew Cardiovascular Evalua-
tions. Ch. 4 of Biomedical Results of Apollo. NASA SP-368, 1975.
^W. Thornton and J. Rummel: Measurement of Crew Somatic and Functional
Changes in Skylab 1/2. Skylab 1/2 Preliminary Biomedical Report, JSC-08439,
1973, pp. 77-94.
^M. Whittle and R. Herron: Stereophotogrammetry. Skylab 1/2 Prelimi-
nary Biomedical Report, JSC-08439, 1973.
^W. Thornton, W. Hoffler, and J. Rummel: Anthropometric and Functional
Changes on Skylab. JSC-08439, 1973, sec. 2-4.
^J. W. Brown:. Zero-g Effects on Crewman Height. JSC IN 76-EW-3, 1976.
^W. Hoffler et al.: Inflight Lower Limb Volume Measurements. JSC ASTP
DTO C, 8, D, 1975.
1-3
WEIGHT CHANGES
SUMMARY
Weight loss has been an apparent constant side effect of space flight.
It has ranged from to 8 percent of body weight and has borne no fixed
relation to mission duration, individual crewman, mission, or vehicle. On
Skylab, the causes of such losses were demonstrated. Other than a small
initial fluid loss, there is no obligatory weight loss associated with space
flight if proper countermeasures are used during flight. On exposure of a
person to weightlessness, a shift of fluid from the more dependent portions
of the body occurs and 2 percent or less of body weight is lost through
diuresis and/or decreased thirst over the first day or two. In a person with
a caloric (food) intake which matches his energy expenditures, there will be
no further loss . On the person's return to a one-g environment, the fluid
lost will be replaced by retention for the first day or two.
It now appears that most of the losses in space flight were caused by
inadequate diet. Energy costs on Skylab were surprisingly high - 203 to 212
kJ per kilogram (22 to 23 kcal per pound) of body weight per day - and
Preflight
In-flight
Postfliqht
Recovery
6 ^N
Time, days
°':^^S.ta"S^'
Figure 1.- Typical loss of body weight during weightlessness and gain after
recovery.
1-4
reflect the pace of crew activity. It also appears that crewmen on most
missions will require as much food as they do on Earth; and in some cases,
considerably more. On the basis of Skylab data, curve I in figure 1 shows a
typical loss that might be expected from normal crewmen in caloric balance.
Curve II shows what might be expected from a crewman with a transient
decreased intake resulting from a vestibular upset (inner ear disturbance
causing vertigo, nausea, or vomiting), an occurrence that will probably
affect 30 percent of all astronauts. After the fluid and caloric losses of
the first 5 days, crewman II remains in balance until he returns to a one-g
environment, at which time the fluid loss is replaced and an increased diet
initiates replacement of the tissue loss incurred in the first day or two of
flight. Any further caloric excess or deficit would be superimposed on these
curves as a loss or gain at approximately 36 mg/kJ (1 lb/3000 kcal) in crew-
men with normal body fat. Such losses may be chronic if caused by an inade-
quate diet, or acute if caused by a transiently increased workload.
Weight Change Data
Virtually every astronaut and cosmonaut has lost weight during space
flight. These losses are tabulated in appendix A, tables A-1 and A-2. This
potential problem of weight loss is intimately associated with problems
discussed in the section on the musculoskeletal system.
On Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, and ASTP missions, astronauts were measured
in the nude after voiding with calibrated clinical scales (platform with
balance arm) which typically have a resolution of 0.1 kg (0.25 lb). These
measurements are given in tabular form in appendix A and plotted
against the logarithm of flight duration in figure 2.
6 -
OF POOR QUaUTX
A
A
A
4 ••
•■•••
• t
♦ Mercury
A Gemini
• Apollo
► Skylab
■ ASTP
>
¥■
♦
_l L_
-J 1 1 1—1-
1 M 1 1 1 — I I ^1 1 1 I I I I ^1 I
' 10 100
Days in flight
Figure 2.- Weight loss as a function of mission and duration.
1-5
On Skylab missions, daily measurements were made before and after flight
with calibrated clinical scales each morning; the astronauts were measured in
the nude immediately after arising and voiding. Body mass was measured in
flight under the same constraints with a nongravimetric mass-measuring device
(Thornton and Ord, 1977) which had a repeatability of ±50 g (±0.1 lb) and an
absolute error of 0.1 to 0.45 kg (0.25 to 1 lb), with the lower figure more
probable.
Data for all Skylab flights are plotted as 3-day sliding averages (i.e.,
data from each day of measurements are averaged with the preceding and
following days' values) against time in figures 3 to 5. Daily weights with-
out averaging are given in appendix A, tables A-3(a) to A-3(c).
Available Russian weight data are given in appendix A, table A-2. The
techniques used to determine these data are unknown. It should be noted that
many of the Russian weight measurements were made up to 24 hours after recov-
ery.
Results and Comments
On the basis of the data in figure 2 and in table A-1 of appendix A,
weight loss would seem to be a consequence of space flight. The amounts of
loss were extremely variable even in the same subject. For example, in
Stafford, the following variations were observed: 1 day, -5.8 percent on
Gemini-Titan 6 (GT-6); 3 days, -1.1 percent on GT-9; 8 days, -1.5 percent on
Apollo 10; and 9 days, +0.9 percent on the ASTP mission. Several attempts to
show a relationship between weight loss and mission duration (Verigo, 1976)
have been unconvincing and break down completely in the face of Skylab
results .
Prior to Skylab, the necessary data on food intake, in-flight stresses,
and other factors required to understand the losses were simply not avail-
able. On Skylab, the in-flight mass measurement plus the knowledge of food
intake provided the data for understanding loss mechanisms. Further, the
rigidly controlled diet was generally increased on each flight, producing in
effect a series of three in-flight experiments. This mass measurement and
diet control, plus individual variation and a 56-day one-g chamber
simulation (Thornton, 1973) with use of the same restricted diet, provided
proof of the primary cause of the losses.
In virtually all of the flights, including most of the Skylab missions,
a calorically inadequate basic diet was supplied as a result of the
assumption that in-flight requirements were less than those for a one-g
environment." Figures 3 to 6 show the opposite to be true. Figure 6 is a
plot of normalized weight loss as a function of energy intake. Extrapolation
to zero loss shows the surprisingly high energy requirements of 203 to 212 kJ
per kilogram (22 to 23 kcal per pound) of body weight per day, or
approximately 15 503.1 kJ (3700 kcal) per day for a 77.1-kg (170 lb) man.
^See footnote 1 on p. 1-3.
1-6
63. On 139
62.6- 138
1 - 137
t\- S 136
-=135
• 134
3 1- 133
59. 9 L
■f
62.1
r61.7
•61.2
60.
60.3
132
F-30 F-2D F-10
Preflight
SL -2 COMMANDER (CDRI
Recovery
10 20
InHlight
RtlOR»16
Postflight
.^Xi-
69.8
- 154
' . Lac
W\0
1 SL -3 COMMANDER
68.9
- 152
nd Recovery
68.0
- 150
-
•
"67.1
66.2
65. 3
- Sl48
- 146
- 144
-
•
•
•
•
•
•
64.4
147
1
1 1 1 t 1 ^ 1 1
f
-21 F-11
Preflight
10 20 30 40 50
In -flight
R+lOR+17
Postflight
79.4
78.5
77.6
St
; 76.7
75.7
74.8
73.9
['I
- 173^
(- 171
169
167
- 165
163
Launch
^^-S.
f-X F-20 F-10
Preflight
SL-2 SCIENCE PILOT (SPT)
Recovery
V.*<
10 20
In-flight
R'lO R*16
Postflight
82.1
81.2
80.3
. 79.4
= 78.5
77.6
76.7
75.7
r 181
179
i\- 177
- ^ 175
M73
171
1
169
L 167
Launch
V."\-*
F-3Q F-20 F-IO
Preflight
SL-2 PILOT IPLT)
II
Recovety
-••v.
•'/-''^
10 20
In-flighl
R»10 R*16
Postflight
Figure 3.- Changes in body mass of
SL-2 crewmen, where F - 10 is
10 days before lift-off, R ■^ 10
is 10 days after recovery, etc.
63.5
62.6
61.7
,-60.8
59.9
138
136
134
59.0 - 130
L 17«
58.1
■-^"'A
Launch
I
SL-3 SCIENCE PILOT
II
Recovery
X^
^V
Preflight
10 20 30 40 50 R*10R*17
In-flighl Postflight
89.3
88.4
87.5
;" 86.6
85.7
84.8
83.9
"V
195
193
185
Launch
-.-V.
Ij SL-3 PILOT
Recovery
F -21 F-11
Preflight
-I 1 1 i_
10 20 30 40 50 R»10RM7
In-flight Postflight
Figure 4.- Changes in body mass of
SL-3 crewmen.
1-7
i
69. Or
152r
68.5- 151
68,0- 150
67.6-
149
- 14
66. 7 L
SL-4 COMMANDER
Launch
Recovery
• •••• ,
n> •
1471
F-27
F-20 F-10
Pretlight
, • • • • *
_j I I I I 1 1—
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
In-flight
R + IO R*19
Postf light
72.6
160
71.7 - 1580-
i - 156
I - 154 -
68.9
- 152
68.0
Launch
%%S- V
1501 —
F-27
V ••-•••.
SL-4 SCIENCE PILOT
Recovery
.• ^ -4
F-20 F-10
Pretlight
_i L.
iJ^^
_i I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
In-flight
R+10 Rtl9
Postf light
68. 9 r
68.0-
„67.1
66.2
152 r
150
64.4
148
146
144
142
SL-4 PILOT
Launch
Recovery
< \.-.-
. /^-^s" V/.
*..-• ^'
«pV
Vv-^'
F-27 F-20 F-10
Pretlight
20 30
40 50
In-flight
60 70
R ♦ 10 Rtl9
Postflight
Figure 5.- Changes in body mass of SL-4 crewmen.
1-8
These values apply only to the Sky-
lab missions, in which performance
requirements were generally sched-
uled to the minute for hard driv-
ing crewmen who often worked well
into sleep and other off duty per-
iods. Other flights may have dif-
ferent requirements.
On the basis of the results
from Skylab simulation and from Sky-
lab flights, there can be little
doubt that the major losses of
weight in space have been caused by
inadequate caloric intake. Examples
of this correlation can be seen in
the results for all three crewmen on
SL-2 (fig. 3), whose losses started
with the controlled diet and contin-
ued throughout the mission. A
similar pattern was seen preflight
in a 56-day Skylab simulation in one
subject on an inadequate diet
(Thornton, 1973).
ifU
'
•
SL-2
C -CDR
•
■
SL-i
S = SP1
p
A
SL-4
P = PLT
li
•
s
C
lU
f-
■
c
P
■
•
■
5
Ub
A
S
C
P
A
n
1
1
1*
1
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Daily energy intake, kcalMb body weight
I 1 1 I I I I
138.4 147.6 156.8 166.0 175.3 184.5 XK.l
Daily energy intake, k J/kg body weight
202,9
Figure 6.- Average weight loss as a
function of average energy intake
of Skylab crewmen. The SL-2 CDR,
the SL-3 SPT, and the SL-4 PLT had
very low body fat and a higher
rate of weight loss.
It was observed that temporary weight decreases can be caused by periods
of increased activity such as reentry preparations - as in the case of all
three SL-2 crewmen (fig. 3) and the SL-3 commander and pilot (fig. 4).
Smaller, long-term losses may be superimposed on other changes, as in the
case of the science pilot on SL-3 (fig. 4), who had small preflight losses
which continued throughout the flight. Another major consideration is poor
intake during the first portion of the mission due to vestibular upset. This
upset, which may range from nausea and vomiting to poor appetite, played a
role in the sharp initial losses observed in SL-3 and SL-4 (figs. 4 and 5).
A second significant source of weight loss is caused by fluid
redistribution. On initial exposure of a person to weightlessness, blood and
other fluids are shifted from the lower, normally dependent portions of the
body to the upper body, with an increase in central blood volume. The body
probably attempts a reduction of this volume by diuresis in accord with the
hypothesis of Gauer and Henry (1963). The initial loss of approximately 2
percent in the first few days of flight and the same rapid gain for the first
few days of recovery are consistent with this theory. Figures 3 and 4 are
good examples of such loss and gain.
In summary, the only obligatory weight loss associated with space flight
is that associated with fluid redistribution. Major losses to date have been
caused by inadequate caloric intake from diets too low in calories or by
inadequate food consumption in flight, especially during the first days of
flight.
1-9
Applications
If diet is adequately controlled, weight losses should cause no
difficulty to spacecraft design or operations. There are some center-of-mass
shifts involved, but these will be treated elsewhere. Indirectly, this
problem will be reflected in the necessity for provision of adequate amounts
of food and oxygen.
HEIGHT CHANGES
SUMMARY
Astronauts will "grow" approximately 3 percent in height (typically
about 5 cm (2 in.)) during the first day or two of weightlessness and then
retain this increase throughout the mission until reexposure to one g, when
the process is reversed. It appears that virtually all of this increase is
caused by a lengthening of the spinal column; thus, the change is limited to
the trunk and neck. Any man/machine interface which is affected by such
changes in height and truncal length will be impacted. Potential design
problems include pressure suits, clothing, and work stations and control
stations with critical eye levels.
These changes which occur in weightlessness are simply the full expres-
sion of daily changes on Earth which result from loading and unloading of the
spinal column. Figure 7 is a curve typical of height changes which occur in
an individual on exposure to weightlessness. The intervertebral disks are
viscoelastic structure responsible
I Weightlessness for the changes, which occur in two
phases. When the column load is
changed, as - for example - when a
person moves from lying to standing
or vice versa, there is an immediate
change in height, AHj^, on the order
of 1 percent. Changes in height are
inversely related to changes in
axial load (e.g., height increases
when one changes from the vertical
to the horizontal under one-g condi-
tions and vice versa).
"-^
Hypothetical
r
Level
persists
indefinitely
10
15 20
Time, tir
30
■^
Days
Figure 7.- Typical curve of height
changes on exposure to weight-
lessness.
If the change in load is maintained,
such as during sleep at night, a
second, slower exponential change in
height, AH2, occurs according to
H = Hq ± AH2(1 - e-t/T)
I-IO
where
H = height at time t
Hq = height at time of load change
AH2 = maximum change in height under changed load
t = time since load was changed
T = subject's characteristic response time
On Earth, AH2 typically amounts to some 1+ percent in adults. The mag-
nitude and time response of change is usually reduced with age and is some-
what higher in females. There is considerable individual variation amounting
to ±30 to ±40 percent in values of AHj and AH2. There are also consid-
erable individual differences in response under one-g conditions as compared
to maximum change under zero-g conditions. Some crewmen showed virtually the
same changes under both conditions, whereas most added another 0.5 to 1.0
percent of height in weightlessness over the maximum changes on Earth.
The following factors should be considered in making one-g height
measurements for weightlessness operations: (1) horizontal rather than ver-
tical subject positions are more appropriate; (2) an even closer approxima-
tion to height in space can be obtained immediately after the subject has had
a night's sleep or been in another horizontal position for a prolonged time;
(3) during transition to and from weightlessness, height will change rapidly,
especially under added g-loads; and (4) all measurements must be carefully
made with the subjects in standard positions (0.16 cm (0.06 in.) is a prac-
tical working resolution), with use of a rigid, carefully calibrated jig.
Height Change Data
Height is a fundamental anthropometric parameter of particular impor-
tance in space flight. Aside from data developed in annual physical examina-
tions, no records of pre-postflight height can be found prior to SL-3 or in
Russian data. A study of in-flight height changes on SL-4 and the ASTP mis-
sion was done by Brown." Isolated height measurements were also made in
flight on SL-4 as a part of an anthropometric package (Thornton et al.,
1977). Followup one-g studies on the SL-4 and ASTP crewmen and other subjects
are underway. Pertinent data from these studies are included here.
Most of the preflight height measurements of SL-4 crewmen were obtained
by using standard clinical techniques. In flight, the Skylab crewmen an-
chored themselves with restraint shoes against a wall and were measured from
°See footnote 6 on p. 1-3.
I-ll
vertex to sole of the shoe with a
square and calibrated tape. Four
series of measurements were made.
Conventional clinical methods were
used after flight, but more atten-
tion was paid to measurement tech-
nique and all scales were calibrated
and read to closer limits. Similar
techniques were used in the ASTP
mission except that in-flight vertex
height was marked on a bulkhead and
this mark was measured from the
"floor."
1.6
Recovery -
Figure 8.- Graph of mean in-flight
SL-4 height measurements.
Initial heights of all astronauts
who have flown in space are given in
appendix A, table A-1, and pre-
flight, in-flight, and postflight
heights of SL-4 astronauts are shown
in appendix B, tables B-1 to B-3.
Figure 8 is a graph of mean in-flight AH measurements of SL-4 crewmen.
Skylab 4 crewmen were very similar to each other in height in the orie-g
environment (±0.25 cm (0.1 in.)). They also showed similar in-flight changes
and the data seem consistent, although the author is suspicious of a small
systematic error on the last day of in-flight measurement. Postflight meas-
urements were not adequately controlled in terms of time, and the exact
course of postflight change is unknown. There was an obvious rapid decrease
during the first few hours after recovery in all three crewmen. Two crewmen
(CDR and PLT) quickly returned to original height, whereas the SPT followed a
more gradual course. Changes in height on going from horizontal to vertical
posture were not determined on the day of recovery; but by the second day,
such changes were in the expected range (>^2 cm (0.8 in.)) and remained there.
Studies of one-g height changes in SL-4 and ASTP crewmen are underway but
incomplete at this time.
The ASTP in-flight data^^ had some obvious inconsistencies; but if these
points are removed and the maximum increases taken, the data are consistent
with Skylab results (see table 2).
Comment and Analysis
Analysis of height changes on Earth provides an understanding of height
changes in weightlessness. Although anecdotal information on such changes on
Earth is relatively common, there is surprisingly little on the subject in
the literature. DePuky (1935) did a study of maximum daily changes in height
in a large population and presented a theoretical basis for such changes, but
he did not follow their time courses.
^^See footnote 6 on p. 1-3.
1-12
O
C
(U
u-l
vO
CN
OJ
vO
f-H
-;r
o
o
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0)
^
CM
CN
ro
CN
n
CN
m
en
00
<u
c
&4
(fl
J=
u
x:
/-^
/— V
^— s
^^v
^
^—^
/-^
/-N
00
^-s
r>.
CX)
CM
ON
^
in
<f
OJ
•H
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
«
•
0)
c
iH
M
CVI
t-l
CN
.-1
CN
CN
K
•w
V— ^
Ns-"-
v»^
^W
>— ^
N-*'
N.^
rn
\D
VD
CO
vD
00
i-l
LO
6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
o
<■
vr
u-1
^
\D
ro
VO
LO
2:
en
u
o
00
O
-a-
•
•
•
ON
o
o
iH
VO
r^
1^
C
CM
1
'•*-'
*w^
V— ^
0)
Q
en
00
OO
S
•
r-.
t^
00
1^
r^
r^
c
CO
(U
CJ
H
M
U
o
z
o
CO
M
n
I
w
<
H
►J
60
01
as
3
cr.
I
I
x:
60
•H
Pi
O
H
00
00
OO
vO
VO
VO
^-'
^-^
>— ^
o
CN
CN
•
•
n
en
en
t^
r^
r^
H
►J
cu
r^
r^
r^
H
^«^
s-^
\.^
cn
<d
o
(3N
<T
•
•
•
00
CN
vO
00
00
00
~cr
iri
O
•
•
■
i-H
O
■— 1
-*
I— 1
en
•
i-(
ON
O
00
r^
00
Q
<
3
T3 --S
O .— >
e^
60 Q
C ^-^
•H
J<i 4-1
O O
O T-l
•^ D.
CN
3
O .^
^§
-a o
c ^
to
C
o
•w
CO
0)
•H
e
II
^
1-13
There are two components of change in height when one goes from one-g to
zero-g conditions or otherwise changes the vertical load on the body. ^ The
first component is an immediate change (AHj^), such as that which occurs when
a person stands up after lying. A second, slower change (AH2) also occurs.
This change is observed on Earth after a person has experienced prolonged
horizontal posture, such as in sleeping. Although both components may be
larger in weightlessness than they are on Earth, there is evidence that it is
primarily the slow component that increases.
Several explanations for these height changes might be considered. The
rapid component (AHj^) could be caused by simple deformation of the soles of
the feet, the closing of joint spaces, or changes in anatomical geometry such
as spinal curvature or intervertebral disk compression. Cursory observation
shows insufficient change in spinal curvature to account for this effect.
Measurements of tissue deformation or leg joint changes also show these to be
negligible. It thus appears that essentially all of these changes occur in
the spinal column from contraction and expansion of the intervertebral disks.
For example, when changes in height throughout the day are measured with the
subject in standing and seated positions, these changes are identical.
This result is entirely consistent with the results of studies of the
characteristics of the intervertebral disks by Kazarian (1975) and others.
These viscoelastic disks occupy approximately 35 percent of the total length
of the spinal column and, under load, show an immediate elastic deformation,
followed by a slower creep. The process is reversed on removal of load.
Figure 9 illustrates three AH curves for a 14- to 16-hour period after a
normal 8-hour sleep period. Subject J. T. (represented by the upper curve),
immediately after awakening, "lost" 0.7 percent of his previous height on
standing. This change, in going from lying to standing or vice versa, typi-
cally remains about the same throughout the day in all subjects as it did
here. During the day, there was an approximately exponential loss of height
(AH2) which reached a total of some 1.8 percent in this younger subject. This
shape is typical of the response curve of all normal subjects. The rate and
amount of change varies from individual to individual and with age and sex
(see table 3). The characteristic or response time of the exponential compo-
nent also varies, typically becoming shorter with increasing age. Such beha-
vior under load is consistent with the mechanical analog shown in figure 10.
On the basis of a few cursory measurements made by adding weights to a
standing subject, S^^ appears to be a linear elastic element described by
Force = Constant x Displacement. This spring constant of S^ provides the
rapid changes (AHj^) which occur in changing posture. It has considerable
individual variation.
l^Changes in height are inversely related to changes in axial load
(e.g., height increases when one changes from the vertical to the horizontal
and vice versa under one g) .
1-14
• S. T. 117 yr old, male) standing
■ J.T. (15yrold. male) standing
♦ J.T. , horizontal
A SL-4 CDR (taken 2 yr after recovery)
* After 1 flour skindiving
All posture vertical unless noted
Time, flour
Figure 9.- An illustration of change in height in one g over an 8- to 14-hour
period after a normal 8-hour sleep period.
1-15
c
tlO
11
c a
" ! '
•H V
i-i III III 1
■a 0)
01
C rH
tu
eg CO
4-1
01 h
j:
4J 00
j:
^^
00 u
■H Oi
2
0) i-t
•H 1 1 > III I
j: U-.
•^ ill III 1
to
■<a
e
CO
—I O rH
^ iH r-l <^ »H
o
5
^
^
o
n
z
u
M
?;
4J
M
u
>J
a
u
>
u
b:
o
b:
u
iH
fe
o
4J
<:
o
c
o
u
ix;
N
S
O
a
4J
00
00
d
U
V
X
z
Od
o
o
z
<
z
l-H
a:
b4
H
H
ad
b
o
<
M
g
5
z
Q
M
§
on
.
W)
H
tH
c
U
U
w
§
■H
j:
o
•n
00
M
c
•H
^
o
CO
OJ
x
z
4J
£
(*1 CN 00
r-N m f-t
O <H fH
in a^ CO
00 r^ 00
vO vD
vO
u-1
o ^^
www
WW
^
^
r-. a^ n
CM CM o
tn 00 ro
o r^ O
fN rsi
in m
s
r- 1— (
in
in
o
^
^
^
^
^
o
CM
-3-
o
(N
o
00
u
ea
.-I m f-4
+ + +
ai cC cc
CO
+ + +
b: oc: oi
+ +
b: tc
00 >,
<
CO
H
.J
+
oi
9
3
1-16
As noted in the summary, the second component of change appears to be of
the form
where
H = height at time t
Hq = height before change in load
H2 = slow component of height change
t = time since change in load
T = time constant characteristic of individual; may also be expressed
in terms of elastic and viscous elements
A typical individual might have
the following characteristics.
Ho = 177.8 cm (70 in.)
T = 30 minutes
If this individual were placed in
weightlessness, then 30 minutes
later ,
H = 70 + 0.8(^1 - e 30
= 70 + 0.8(1 - e-1)
= 70 + 0.5
= 179.1 cm (70.5 in.)
and after 3 hours (180 minutes) of
weightlessness,
/ _180\
H = 70 + O.Syi - e 30/
= 70 + 0.8(1 - e~^)
= 70 + 0.8(0.997)
= 179,8 cm (70.8 in.)
Y///////////////////A
Figure 10.- First-order mechanical
analog consistent with changes in
axial mechanical loading and un-
loading. The symbol S\ repre-
sents an elastic component in
series with a second elastic com-
ponent S2, which is paralleled
by a viscous resistance D.
1-17
This expression means that if an astronaut's preflight base height is
177.8 cm (70 in.), he will gain approximately 2 cm (0.8 in.) in the second
phase of weightlessness "growth." This result is consistent with the
behavior of a parallel spring S2 and a damper D with a response
Force = Velocity x Constant, shown in figure 10. A preliminary study of a
few male and female subjects shows that females have greater elasticity and
that age reduces both elasticity and damping (or viscosity). Such a model is
not inconsistent with the anatomy and histology of the disks. One-g height
changes in a few subjects, expressed in terms of each of the two components
of height change, are given in table 3.
In weightlessness, the changes were greater. The author suspects that
the increases were caused by some relaxation of the anterior spinal ligament,
which appears to be the limiting element of intervertebral space. Another
conceivable explanation of this greater change is the relative increase in
tissue fluids that is known to occur in the upper body under a condition of
weightlessness. Still other considerations are possible, such as a flat-
tening of normal spinal curvature or a relaxation of ligaments and muscles
with an attendant opening of joint spaces of the hips and legs.
At this time, it does not appear possible to predict the total height
change in weightlessness from one-g studies. One crewman showed the same
amount of change but, in most of the crewmen, weightlessness produced a
height increase on the order of an additional 1 percent over that seen on the
ground .
Design Applications
The first area of consideration is the problem of closely fitting
garments such as space suits, especially in view of some of the difficulties
experienced in donning the suits in weightlessness and in view of the planned
use of a hard torso suit. If, as appears probable, a change in torso length
of 5+ cm (2+ in.) occurs, such a change must be allowed for in this suit.
Other areas for consideration are eye heights in critical work station
design and in cockpit seating. On Shuttle reentry with a prolonged period of
g-load, one can expect a loss of 2.5+ cm (1+ in.) prior to landing. Although
this loss would probably not be critical, seat adjustments should be allowed
for. The temptation to simply transfer one-g dimensions to zero-g situations
must be resisted.
In making one-g height measurements for space operations, several con-
siderations should be observed: (1) horizontal rather than vertical subject
positions are more appropriate; (2) an even closer approximation to height in
space can be obtained immediately after the subject arises from a night's
sleep or other prolonged horizontal position; (3) during transition to and
from weightlessness, height will change rapidly; and (4) all measurements
must be carefully made with the subjects in standard positions (0.16 cm (0.06
in.) is a practical working resolution).
1-18
POSTURE
SUMMARY
In weightlessness, the relaxed, unrestrained human body automatically
assumes and indefinitely maintains a single characteristic posture (see fig.
11). To force other postures on the body, either by the subject himself or
through external constraint, frequently leads to discomfort, fatigue, and
inefficiency. Characteristics of this weightless posture include plantar
flexion of the feet and flexion of hips and knees with slight abduction of
the legs. The thoraco-lumbar spine is straightened or even slightly flexed
anteriorly. Although the cervical spine (neck) is straightened, it is also
angled anteriorly, a positioning forcing the head inferiorly and anteriorly
and thus lowering the normal angle of vision. Arms and shoulders are ele-
vated, arms are abducted, and there is moderate elbow flexion.
-.«
•r.
>
.->-'*■* ■*!*:-*
(a) Front view.
Reproduced from
best available copy.
(b) Side view.
Figure 11.- An SL-4 crewman in a relaxed, unrestrained posture that the human
body automatically assumes and indefinitely maintains in weightlessness.
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
1-19
Many one-g positions such as sitting or bending, which depend upon grav-
ity for loading forces, are particularly incompatible with this natural
weightlessness posture since active muscle forces or heavy external
constraints are required to maintain them and rapidly result in fatigue and
pain. On Earth, gravity is also depended upon for stabilization, and some
substitute stabilizing mechanism must be provided in flight for many tasks.
Foot restraints appear to be the most satisfactory means; but for many tasks,
additional body restraints should be available.
All the considerations for design interface with the weightlessness
posture cannot be detailed here, but the reader is urged to consult the
documentation by Gundersen and Bond^'' and by Jackson et al.^-* and similar
detailed considerations as they become available.
Design areas in which this posture must be considered are as follows:
work stations and workspace, including equipment; operating and observation
stations; any temporary work area in which tasks of even a few minutes in
length must be undertaken; rest, sleep, exercise, and eating areas; and
virtually every area where man must interface with a vehicle or system in
space. Changes in posture must also be integrated with changes in height and
shape for proper design.
Postural Changes
The human body in weightlessness naturally assumes and maintains a
posture as characteristic of the species and environment as the more upright
stance is characteristic of posture on Earth. The weightless posture differs
greatly from any normal one-g posture, and the body rebels with fatigue and
discomfort against any attempts to force it into one-g postures or appliances
consistent with one-g postures. Chief characteristics of the weightless
posture, as described in the summary, are shown in figure 11. For comforta-
ble, efficient design, these features must be accommodated. The design
engineer must study each situation carefully, thinking in terms of
weightlessness rather than one-g. Gundersen and Bond'-^ and Jackson et al.^^
have made excellent beginnings in this area.
In the one-g environment, large parts of man's musculoskeletal and neu-
rological systems are dedicated to maintaining a stable position under the
forces of gravity. The human body has developed a series of natural
positions - standing, squatting, sitting, and lying, among others - dependent
upon the amount of support available and upon many other factors, including
ethnic history. Most of these resting postures are attained by bringing the
various body parts into positions that can be equilibrated against gravity
l^Robert T. Gundersen and Robert L. Bond: Zero-g Work Station Design.
JSC IN 76-EW-l, 1976.
l^John Jackson, Robert Bond, and Robert Gundersen: Neutral Body Posture
in Zero g. JSC-09551, 1975.
1-20
with a minimum expenditure of energy. These positions are dynamic, not
static, and depend upon a host of sensor-nerve-muscle loops to constantly
apply small corrections. If forces on the body are changed, posture changes
accordingly. Development of a large belly, for example, produces lordosis.
Under weightlessness, the body is faced with a totally new situation.
Not only are the large antigravity muscles and associated servoloops
unopposed by gravity, but the various positions which depend upon gravity for
stabilizing forces are now inappropriate. Designs of furniture, machines, and
the like which depend upon gravity are usually inappropriate in space (e.g.,
chairs or a "bicycle" ergometer with a standard seat) .
It is not surprising that the body finds a new, entirely different
single position of equilibrium, a position usually incompatible with one-g
designs. Also, not surprisingly, this new posture caused low-back discomfort
in a few crewmen, who found that they could obtain relief by wedging them-
selves against a structure and pushing to apply force to the back, simulating
gravitational forces on Earth. Many astronauts have described some of the
design inadequacies and some of the difficulties of working in the weightless
environment. Following are typical comments. ^'^
"And so the upshot was that, at the food table and at the ATM panel, you
had to hunch down in order to get a decent level ..."
"... your abdomen and your muscles tensed up and you just got tired of
it. What we need to do is remember the postural situation up there and
the fact that it is quite natural to be standing up; so you might as
well get all of your work surfaces and . . . your eating surfaces up
here (indicating chest height)."
"But one of the things that really bothers you is that you have to
remain in a crouch position in order to take these observations. This
requires continual muscle tension. I don't mean to be critical. I'm
saying it just doesn't work right."
"When you are adapting things to conform to the human body in zero grav-
ity, you've got to be careful. We found that the body normally wants to
assume a more or less erect, slightly arched attitude, and holding your-
self in a chair was difficult. The seatbelt helped, although it was
hard to adjust."
"Body posture is one of your big problems."
". . .a crouching action is very difficult in zero g; so if you design
a foot restraint where there's a posture requiring a crouching action,
then you're not helping us at all."
l^See footnote 13 on p. 1-20.
1-21
i
"Your legs tend to come up a little bit so that they're partially bent.
I estimate 30° from being in a straight line with your spine, both at
the hip joint and at the knee joint. Your shoulders tend to shrug a
little bit because you don't have gravity holding them dovm. Your mus-
cles will tend to pull them up a little bit."
Documentation of this postural configuration was not obtained until SL-4
(Thornton et al., 1977). Photographs were made on the SL-3 flight^^ with the
subjects in the erect anatomical position (an example of one-g thinking on
the author's part); but on the following mission, preflight, in-flight, and
postflight photographs were made with the crewmen in relaxed as well as
anatomical posture. Typical photographs from SL-3, with the PLT in forced
erect posture, are shown in figures 12 and 13. These photographs added
little to existing anthropometric knowledge. The thoraco-lumbar lordotic
curve is still present. There is a slight tendency to lean back and incline
the head, but this observation was not properly appreciated until the SL-4
photographs with relaxed crewmen were seen. Figure 11 is from this latter
series and shows the subject in typical weightless, relaxed posture with eyes
closed. Figures 14 and 15 are tracings of such photographs. This posture
was seen from the first through the last photographs, showing that such
posture was quickly acquired and maintained throughout the mission. Tracings
of the segment angles were made from the entire series^" and are shown in
figure 16.
Once documented, this position was easy to recognize in many unposed
work situations, such as that shown in figure 17. Further evidence that this
postural response is natural to weightlessness was obtained when underwater
photographs^" were made with subjects in the relaxed position (see fig. 18).
As can be seen in figure 18(b), the position more closely approximated that
assumed in weightlessness when visual cues were removed by blocking vision
through the mask.
Mechanisms Leading to Weightlessness Posture
The weightlessness posture adopted in space appears to be inherent and
relatively unchanging since it is quickly assumed and showed no significant
change in 84 days of weightlessness. This observation was further supported
by crew comments. Further, this posture is assumed in water immersion.
Reasons for this posture should provide a fascinating subject of study
for anthropometrists , anatomists, neurologists, and physiologists. A full
discussion of the subject is beyond the purview of this document, but a few
comments are irresistible. Elevation and abduction of the arms might be ex-
plained on the basis of increased muscle mass/strength in the abductor-
elevator-flexor area, but this argument cannot apply to the legs, where the
situation is reversed. Kennedy, at the U.S. Air Force Aerospace Medical
^^See footnote 5 on p. 1-3.
l^See footnote 12 on p. 1-20.
1-22
Reproduced from
best available copy.
■Tv7
Figure 12.- The SL-3 PLT in a forced
erect posture in weightlessness.
Figure 13.- Side view of the SL-3 PLT
in forced erect posture in flight.
Preflight, standing
l<^
In-fligfit, relaxed
Vi >\
Prefligfit
In -Might
PostfliqtM
Figure 14.- A front-view comparison of Figure 15.- A side-view comparison of
one-g and weightless posture in the one-g and weightless posture in the
SL-4 SPT (tracings from photographs). SL-4 SPT (tracings from photographs)
1-23
ORlGiHAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
Vertical
reference —
Figure 16.- The segment angles of the
weightless neutral body position.
Figure 17.- The body position of the
SL-3 PLT while loading film illus-
trates the relaxed posture in an
unposed work situation.
Research Laboratory (AMRL), made a surprisingly good prediction of weightless
posture by simply placing links and segments in their midrange (Simons,
1964). Although the link positions in weightlessness must be the result of
muscle forces, such forces are not simply the product of available muscle
mass/tension. Rather, the tension is controlled by a series of feedback
loops which begin with force transducers in muscles and tendons and are
modified by a host of other secondary and tertiary inputs. Could the posi-
tion of limbs then be caused simply by completely unloaded myotatic loops
which have their predominant action against gravity? If similar loops are
active in the neck region, such a mechanism, plus spinal straightening, might
account for cervical angulation. Reasons for straightening of the thoraco-
lumbar spine are not obvious; the pelvis has obviously rotated, but whether
this rotation is cause or effect is not yet clear. Much more data will be
needed to completely characterize and understand posture and actions under
weightlessness conditions.
1-24
OF POOR Q^JA.L»TY
*P^'^ —
"3^
1
cz
,.''r
,!i
(a) With unblocked vision.
Reproduced from
best available copy.
(b) With blocked vision, resulting in
a posture more closely approxi-
mating that assumed in null
gravity.
Figure 18.- Underwater photographs of subject in a relaxed, neutral buoyancy
posture.
Implications and Applications
For efficient man/machine design for space flight, this weightless pos-
ture must be taken into account. Space limitations preclude a detailed
discussion of' design criteria here, but a few general considerations are of-
fered. Insofar as possible, one should start with an absolutely clean slate
as regards carryover of one-g design to weightlessness design. Each element
of design must be examined only in the light of weightless considerations.
Every feature must be examined to see if gravity or one-g orientation influ-
enced the design. If so, the feature must be suspect. The following facts
must always be considered.
1. There is no up or down or preferred orientation. Crewmen reset
their reference frames at will and without difficulty. There is no reason
not to utilize the relative ease of positioning in any reference frame ("up,"
"down," or "sideways") so long as surrounding spaces are clear.
2. There is no weight to support. Chairs, couches, beds, and other de-
vices to reduce fatigue are useless in this respect. On Skylab, the seat at
the Apollo telescope mount console was little used by the first crew and dis-
carded entirely by the second and third crews.
1-25
i
3. Absence of gravity removes body stabilization, which must be pro-
vided by alternatives. The primary alternative is a foot restraint, which in
many situations appears to be adequate. Both experience and theoretical con-
siderations lead to the conclusion that additional stabilization at the thigh
and waist, and perhaps at other points, would be desirable for many tasks.
4. This basically single posture associated with weightlessness must be
accommodated if fatigue and discomfort are to be avoided. Having to maintain
some positions in weightlessness may produce much more stress than an equiva-
lent position on Earth since muscles might be called on to supply forces
which were normally supplied by gravity. Stooping and bending are examples
of positions which always caused abdominal fatigue. The natural heights and
angles of weightlessness posture must be accommodated. Although more infor-
mation is needed in many of these areas, available data still provide a point
of departure. Some of the areas to be considered are as follows.
a. Since the feet are plantar-flexed at approximately 25 percent,
sloping rather than flat shoes or restraint surfaces should be considered.
b. The weightlessness stance is not vertical since hip/knee flexion
displaces the torso backward, away from the footprint. Height is now located
at a point between sitting and standing; so a work surface must be higher
than one designed for normal sitting tasks. The feet are also positioned
somewhere between a location directly below the torso (as in standing) and a
point well out in front of the torso (as in sitting).
c. Elevation of the shoulder girdle and arm flexion also make ele-
vation of the work surface desirable. Although in weightlessness the head is
angled forward and down, a positioning which depresses the line of sight,
eye-to-work level may remain practically the same.
d. Under weightlessness, there is no reason to keep work surfaces
flat, and they should probably be tilted to accommodate the visual angles.
5. Reference should be made to the publications listed, and to others
as they become available, when any weightlessness design is attempted.
The preceding considerations represent only the most rudimentary begin-
ning approach to zero-g design problems. Each case must be approached fresh-
ly and with imagination.
SHAPE AND CENTER OF MASS
SUMMARY
The human body has large elastic and fluid components that must change
in shape when subjected to change in forces such as occur in going from a
one-g environment to weightlessness and vice versa. Other changes in shape
may occur through loss or gain of fat and muscle. These changes experienced
1-26
on exposure to weightlessness may be classified in three categories according
to their time course and origin.
1. Immediate - seconds to minutes, caused by elasticity and plasticity
of the body
2. Rapid - minutes to days, caused by fluid shifts
3. Slow - days to months, caused by atrophy of fat and muscle or
replacement of muscle by fat
There are immediate changes in height (which also had a slower compo-
nent, as already described) and in abdominal girth with the subject in ana-
tomical position (standing erect with arms at sides). The latter change may
amount to 10 cm (4 in.) or more. In the next day or two, approximately
1 liter of fluid is lost from each leg, much of which goes to the head and
supracardiac region where it produces puffiness in the face and mucosal con-
gestion. Both of these changes persist, apparently indefinitely, until the
subject returns to a one-g environment.
Slow changes through loss or gain of fat and muscle may be superimposed
on the aforementioned changes (i.e., loss of fat will usually further reduce
abdominal girth). The time course and magnitude of such changes are entirely
dependent upon diet and exercise. An inadequate diet will result in fat and
muscle losses, with the ratio depending on individual body- fat percentages.
If this diet inadequacy is coupled with inadequate exercise, even more rapid
muscle loss occurs. An adequate diet and inadequate exercise will result in
an increase of fat and a decrease in muscle. In short, these slow changes
are no different from everyday one-g experience.
Without proper exercise, crewmen will lose muscle primarily from their
legs. On flights to date, there have been significant losses of body fat and
muscle through inadequate diet and lack of proper exercise. Such losses can
only hurt crew performance on return to the one-g environment, especially
that of the well-conditioned crewman with minimal body fat. Most
importantly, with adequate diet and exercise, such tissue changes will be
either negligible or nonexistent .
All these changes tend to shift the center of mass cephalad more than
can be accounted for by height increases. These changes typically amount to
3 to 4 cm, measured from the soles of the feet.
Although the previously described changes are primarily of interest to
the life scientists, accommodations in clothing and other personal gear must
be made. Above all, prevention of tissue (fat and muscle) changes must
always be considered in system design.
Changes in Shape
Seventy percent of the body is water, with some 30 percent of this being
outside the cells. In addition, several body areas mechanically behave as
1-27
COMMANDER
Neck circumference at larynx
@ Chest circumference at nipple
(inspiratory (insp. I and
expiratory (exp. II
(2) Arm volume (girth every 3 cml
(D Arm volume (girth every 3 cml
® Abdominal circumference at
umbilicus
® Hip circumference at greatest
diameter
(2) Leg volume (girth every 3 cml
(D Leg volume (girth every 3 cml
® Height
6r
-2 1
^ D
g ??
i -4
<
Hr^'-^"—---^-------^
-'O--
v,>-^'
n Height
Circumferences
O Chest (insp.)
O Chest (exp. I
A Waist
_l_
_]_
10 20
30
40 50 60
Mission day
70 80 R +
I R + 17
►10
Figure 19.- Anthropometric measure-
ments made on the Skylab crewmen.
Figure 20.- Truncal girth changes of
SL-4 crewmen in an anatomical posi-
tion in weightlessness with one-g
measurements as a baseline.
fluids in elastic compartments, whereas other body components have elastic
and plastic properties. It should not be surprising that changes in shape
occur as the body is moved from a one-g environment to weightlessness and
vice versa. Although these changes probably have more implications for the
biomedical researcher than for the man/machine designer, there are several
changes that could affect clothing and personal equipment. Such changes in
shape also overlap and reflect changes in other anthropometric areas, such as
muscle function.
Shape variations can be placed in three categories, based on time course
and mechanism.
1. Immediate - seconds to minutes, caused by elasticity and plasticity
of the body
2. Rapid - minutes to days, caused by fluid shifts
3. Slow - days to months, caused by atrophy of fat and muscle or re-
placement of muscle by fat
Immediate Changes
Immediate changes occur in areas of the body containing elastic
elements^' that would be under load in the one-g environment, such as the
'■'Muscle tone is included for present purposes.
1-28
SCIENCE PILOT
PILOT
, 0--
/
y-<^-"
n Height
Circumferences
o Chest (insp.)
Chest lexp.)
A Waist
6
4
I
I -2
£
Circumferences
O Chest (insp.l
O Chest (exp. ) D Height
d Waist
40 50 60
Mission day
70 80 84R + 0R+1
_L.
_!_
_l_
-J_
10 20
30
40 50 60 70
Mission day
_L.
R+OR + l
Figure 20.- Concluded.
intervertebral disks (see the section on height) and the abdominal region.
In the absence of tissue changes such as fat or muscle loss, these changes
will disappear on reexposure of the body to one g. Figure 19 depicts meas-
urements made before and after flight on SL-2, SL-3, and SL-4 and in flight
on SL-4. Truncal measurements are tabulated in appendix C, tables C-l(a) to
C-l(c). Plots of the immediate changes seen in SL-4 crevmen are shown in
figure 20.
Unfortunately, the area of most interest here, the first minutes of
weightlessness, must remain a subject of speculation until future flights.
The early portions of the curves shown in figure 20 are based on theoretical
considerations and one-g measurements. Changes in height have already been
discussed. The large waistline reductions may be explained by elimination of
equivalent hydrostatic force on the abdominal contents, which may be con-
sidered semiliquid here. This liquid column is normally constrained
anteriorly and laterally by the abdominal muscles. Under weightlessness, un-
balanced forces from these muscles move the contents inward and upward until
they are counterbalanced by other elastic forces. In both the United States
(Sawin, 1977) and the Russian (Kakurin, 1971) programs, a loss of vital
capacity in weightlessness has been documented that probably is in part a
reflection of increased visceral pressure against the diaphragm. Another
portion of the shift in abdominal volume is accounted for by the general
elongation of the trunk through height expansion.
Changes in chest dimensions are smaller and less easy to explain but ap-
pear to be consistent. The reduced dimensions could be due to an increase in
the costo-vertebral angles secondary to the elongation of the spine, possibly
1-29
followed by some in-flight adaptation of costo-vertebral ligaments and inter-
costal and other musculature. There were no significant changes detected in
neck and hip girth on SL-4.
Another area in which immediate and probably rapid change is to be
expected is the female breast, but there has not yet been an opportunity to
make the pertinent studies in this area.
Rapid Changes
The rapid changes that occur over a matter of hours to days are caused
by fluid redistribution. Again, the full expression of mechanisms that are
active to a lesser degree under one-g conditions is being seen. For exam-
ple, everyone is familiar with slightly swollen ankles after standing, puffy
eyelids after a night's sleep, and similar one-g manifestations of fluid
shifts. When the normal adult stands, there is an unbroken column of blood
in veins and arteries from heart to foot, with a linearly increasing
hydrostatic pressure from the heart downward that reaches 90 mm Hg and more
in the foot.^® The head and neck veins are empty until they reach a level
just above the heart. Arterial pressure to head and neck is linearly reduced
by the height of its hydrostatic column; that is, portions of the body below
the heart have increased fluid pressures, whereas those above the heart have
relatively lower pressures. This increased pressure is partially offset by
an increased number of elastic elements in the lower body. On exposure of
the body to weightlessness, all hydrostatic forces vanish and the venous
pressures are essentially equal everywhere, with the tissues below the heart
at relatively lower fluid pressures than "normal" and those above the heart
at higher fluid pressures. Fluid now tends to move out of the areas below
the heart which have increased elasticity and pressures and into those above
with less tissue pressure.
Among the first and most consistent "symptoms" of weightlessness were
stuffy noses and a feeling of head fullness secondary to increased pressure
and fluid shifts. The first evidence of the extent of these fluid shifts was
obtained from a set of SL-2 in-flight "mug shots" at the end of the mission
showing puffy faces, edematous eyelids, and full head and neck veins. These
changes are now well documented (but not measured) and appear to persist as
long as one is in weightlessness.
It was not until SL-4 that the magnitudes of the fluid shifts were docu-
mented, with in-flight segmental girth measurements of the arms and legs^"
(Thornton et al., 1977). Volumes were calculated from limb girths every 3 cm
by assuming that the arms and legs consisted of a series of regular truncated
cones. Repeatability was on the order of 100 ml for legs of 70-kg subjects.
^°This hydrostatic pressure is added to any existing arterial or venous
pressure.
^°Postflight volume measurements could not show the magnitude of changes,
for the volumes change toward normal quite rapidly.
1-30
Left-limb volume changes of SL-4
crewmen are graphed in figure 21,
and volumes of both legs are tabu-
lated in table 4. Note that volume
changes of 1+ liters per leg oc-
curred in all crewmen. It was not
possible to follow the right-leg
volume changes as closely as those
in the left leg because of schedule
problems. There were differences
between the two, but it was not pos-
sible to determine significant dif-
ferences from available data. How-
ever, a total volume of approximate-
ly 2 liters was lost from the legs
and shifted elsewhere in the body
through the elastic forces de-
scribed. Preflight and postflight
measurements were made with the
crewman in a supine position to min-
imize errors from gravitational
pooling of blood. This fluid then
was tissue fluid, which could have
been lost as urine, through inade-
quate replacement, etc.; however,
simultaneous body weight changes
could account for only one-half or
less of this quantity.
.,— Launch
COMMANDER
S -. 3 -
c
o
Leg
I Recovery
-Nr-
-Nr-
59 80
Mission day
SCIENCE PILOT
37 59 82 2
Mission day
10 14
It is also obvious from figure
21 that the arms did not play a sig-
nificant role. Hips showed a small
in-flight loss in circumference (ap-
pendix C, tables C-2(a) to C-2(c)),
and there was no significant change
in the neck. The author suspects
that the hip loss was fluid, for, in
the one-g environment, there is
still appreciable hydrostatic pres-
sure at this level. This previous
account leaves only the head and
upper torso as possible areas for
absorbing the 1 liter or more of
fluid. There is no question that the
tissues of the head were "wet"
(i.e., relatively edematous), but
this condition should account for
only 100 to 200 ml at most. The re-
mainder must have been distributed
within the upper torso but obscured
by other changes in this area.
• 3r
...Launch
PILOT
31 59 82 2
Mission day
10 14
Figure 21.- Changes in left-limb
volumes of SL-4 crewmen.
"I':iNAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
1-31
c
(U
y
u
(U
ao (SI iri
csj CM r^ n CO
rn O O CM
o.
VO O CNl
o ^o r^ o a\
00 (J\ \0 r-i
o
>
in rH <■ vo r^
.-I i-l i-l i-H iH
I I I I I
r^CX3CX3<TCM-cl-CMCO
r^u-ILTlrHCMCMOOvO
^^r^iHcnfn<^fn,-icMr-<,H
I I I I I I I I I I
CT\ 00 iH
u-{
#1
O vo Oi 1
vO iH r^ CM ^
Q)
•
LO r^ r-H
CM r^ o O <r
i-J
iH
1
1-1 00 iH CM CO
f-l 1 iH .H rH
>
1 III
cncMrHO^ r^iOi-inoO'Xir^oocMOOoi^
HCMO^CMOOOOlOi— IOO\Diri
^~3•^^0000vO'O<^CT^^t^CM
Oi-lin ICMCMCMCM IrH-HrH
III I I I I I
+
Pi
c
CD
r^ -a- r^ ^
ro ^ m ^ CM
a\i-imfncoo<^f^<"^ooro
M
lO
ro
m vo
O m
<3^ ^a' CM
•
<r
r^
i-l CT\
r^ CM
06 <j\ m
1-1
-a-
in
in <•
en vD
m CM iH
o
r~
r^
r^ r^
VO VD
\0 ^ '^O
>
Q
u
0)
ex
o
>
in CM rv
r~. ^ CM
... I
O rn I I
in
a\ <t <x>
o m r^
I I I
^<rvOCMrnoor^rHin-a-cT\cM
OOmcMrHi-ICMCMvOO^incM
CJ^no^-^•cMCMcMcM-^■y3^0vD
OcMiH<fv3-(»cMr^inr-~
oo^rtnc^-^rini — mocM
vo en \D en -^r
I I I I I
I rM I
CM <m
I
u
o
I
c
o
•a
G
O
•H
(0
CO
•H
e
en
4J
00
00
o
>
vO O ON
-a-
C3N o cr»
in r~- ,-H 1
o
CM 00 r~
r-j 1 1
00
1
00 O i-H
1 >-( t-H
I I
m-a-inocnoo^-oouninCTscM
ooinvoocMcnoocMmor~~cM
oinooinm<rcM-crmcMinr^
incM-a-cMfn ii— i i,— i (,— icm
I I I I I I I
(U
u
o
t-l
01
U3
cjN in r^ \0
1— ICM>HO-a-00CM00rH,-Hr^00
CD CO
Q ^
•
in
-a-
in
in
-<r
in
-a-
-H 1
r^ 1
~a-
00 in
00 o^
en est
in
en
O
CM
ON
in
en in
00
en m
fK
Pm
ta
Pt.
§g
r-~oc3NinenrHr-~e-^<T>inr^r^
v£)CM00cM<rcn-a-encMinT— i-a-
cjNCMo>cMiH-a-rn-a'vo~a-cnr^
v£ir^vr>r^r^r-~r-~r~-r-~r~r-»r~~
1— I r~ iH 00
O^ CMcn<ri/ir^i-<i— len^
+ + + + + + + + + + +
« •
U
m (U
m >
o
CO (J
•H <U
U
I
M
(U
U
iM eg
!
CO
1-32
60
0)
c
0)
o
u
0)
p.
o
>
O <f <■ 00
00 f^ r~- 00
in 00 ON <■ m ro
o 00 n <■ r-i tH
^ I ^ iH iH .-I
I I I I I
iri>— iooojoN-3-vOO<r-<r>— I
-J n CNI CSI rH I
I I I I
a)
0)
O
>
ON 00 CN| O
• • • •
rH »sD 0> 0^
O O u-i <•
I
CM 00 -J- rO CT^ i-l
r— LncNno-3'Oc^'^iH"^
in
^
.-H
CM
a>
^
n
as
O
-*
o
ON
00
1
tH
1
i-l
1
0^
1
00
un^csir^mf^Lnr^roooo
o-i cNi cN >— I >— I I I uo -<r
I I I I
CO iH I— I Ln ON
r-- I— I lo vo o oo
(N~crr~-\i>CT\LntT>cNc^jo<j-
•T3
<U
3
C
•H
AJ
c
H
o
P-i
u
C/2
w
►J
oa
H
O
>
r-. o Lo in un
CO csi ON 00 n
CNl 00 0\ O ON
00 r-^ r-~ 00 r-^
O CTi <■ fO vo o\
O r^ t^ ON c-g ro
iH cNi oQ r-~ o O
r^ r>. v^ v£> I — r^
ONONOCMincNiu-iLnvocMcsi
r^oOiHvnoooooT-HvDcsi^
iri^or^r^ooNOOocjNLOc^
r^r^r^r-^oor--r^oor^oooo
(U
u
)^
0)
a
OOCSI -J- tH
u-i
00
• . • • 1
1 • 1 1
•s
rOcM LO CO 1
O
1 ON 1 1
•
iH
iHrHinnro<3-r^<-mo<r
00 vo cN ro cNi I <i- LO
I I I I
o
>
x:
00
•H
Pi
o
>
ON<^ OO vO
Ono o oo
o r^ <^ <f
fn,H <- cN
00 I
I
roi— i-a-ONrocNioo-a-tHoNin
rn^ONOONOrHLOCsJt-Ht— I.— t
<-oooNLOoonu-)n<roJc^
vo ^ i-i tN ,— I I m ^
I I I I
e
ON rn oo NO o
r~i
NO
•
•
#1
-<3- O <r CM S3-
NO
1 00 I
•
-J- cN r-- cJN -cr
o
1 NO 1
rH
CNi rH CO iH CJN
iH
iH
o
00 OO 00 00 r^
r->
r->
>
rs.cjNNOiHmoooo<rrH(T>m
I I oi^f^^Tsa-cNONNominLO
I I Om<J-OOCNiHC3NI~~OONOr^
CO^r^NOrHOCTNONONCSICO
I — r^r^r-soor-^r^rs-rs-oooo
Q
LO O ON
CO CO iH ON LTl
I I I I I
Pb fo pLH pL4 pLi
rs. ON ,H
CO in CX3 on in oo
I I I I I I
.H r^ iH 00
OiHcNn-3-inr-.rHrHcnvo
+++++++++++
DioipipioioioiBioSoioi
1-33
c
(U
u
u
<u
o
>
cs vo r^ (N
CM
I
I I
00 -a- 00 ~3- ON
I a\ en rn r^ en
I rH M iH f-l
I I I I
^Ha^l— l-*oo-*-<rcsiinaN(Ti
M 1-1
I
CT\ Lo vr lo ro L^ -^ I
I I I I I I I
60
01
iH
t-(
e
4J
M-l
•^
(U
•
•J
.-H
O
>
O "H O 1^
ON -^ CM OO r^
t^oooNrorOrHoocNONr-^r^
• • • • 1
1
r^ \o <r ^ 1
1 ro r-l 00 ui CO
r~ eg lO iH
r^ v£) 00 r^ ON
.H M 1
r^ O o <^ O
1 1
1 r-l rH tH .H
1 1 1 1
00CSO\v£)0NaNND~d-vDO\O
i-ivo>-itMONcN<-f— i^<rr^
r^<-ro-3-cs<-rO |i-(,H
I I I I I I I I
<u
3
a
G
O
u
I
-3-
w
■J
H
i-J
>
B
(U
o
(U
p.
o
>
iH O -H \£) rH
r~ 00 00 iH -a-
1-1 VO -3" 00 ON
r- 1^ ON 00 00
r- r--. r-~ r^ r~
CNl r^ On en <f
vS-rOCSlOOOOOrOONCNIOOOO
ON r^ ,H o
• • • • I
iH CN NO CM I
o CM in 00 tn
CM CO o "H ON
1-1 00 00 m r^
r^ ^ NO NO ^
mr-i~a-r^va-tnr-~CT\r-~ro--a-
r^ror^vDON^-3-r--.i^-d-ND
iH-^m<rinvj-inoor^OON
r^r^r-»i — f^r^r~r-~r-^oor^
CM O iH
I • • •
I rH CJN r^
Oc^focMOiHr^r-^noLn
v3- CO iH CO i-l
I I I I I
i-l CM CM CO O
00
ID
•H
•H
4-1
e
00 CM H i-H
r^ CO r^
j:
• • • •
• • ■
00
«^
00 S3- O 00
00 ON CM
•H
•
CO ON in ~a- 1
1 1 rH u-l CM
CHi
o
>
iH iH <J- rH 1
I 1 00 NO u-l
t 1 1
CMCMCM<J\000000<rrHtriOO
tnCOvtu'N^r^i/NNONOOCJN
CJN-*CJN<Or-~ CMO\vX3CNvO
CMCMICMI rHrHiHCNir^
III I
B
CM vO u~l in -"J-
r^ rH r-^
^
vo iH r~ in i^
1 1 00 00 <r
m
vO CM r~- r~- CM
1 1 o NO O
r^
<r in r~. ^ CO
in NO 00
o
r~ r-^ r-> t^ r-.
NO NO ^
>
CMCMCMinNOCMvOCOinONCM
cM<TCOrHOinrHcocor-~r^
cooocooNincoocMcjN<rcjN
OOCMocMcocMinvj-ino
r-^r^r-~r^i^r^r^r^r-^r^oo
Id
Q
m o ON
CO CO rH ON in
I I I I I
pLi [b pLl pLi pL,
rH CJN rH
CO in 00 CO in 00
I I i t I I
e
rH r^ rH 00
OrHCMrO<J-inr~~rHrHrOvO
+++++++++++
Bioiojoioiospiocloiciioi
1-34
If the leg and arm volumes are subdivided, it will be seen that, on a
percentage basis, the lower legs lost relatively less fluid than the thighs.
This difference may be explained by the greater amount of fluid-containing
tissue found in the thighs compared to that found in the relatively bony
lower legs. Conversely, the lower arms lost slightly more fluid than the
upper arms, a difference which may be explained by the increased elasticity
in the lower arms, which have a tissue/bone ratio more nearly approaching
unity. The exact time course of these fluid volume shifts remains to be de-
termined, but it is probably exponential and may have some initial oscilla-
tions. Fluid redistribution apparently follows a reciprocal course over a
time span of 2 or 3 days on return of the body to a one-g environment.
The results of an ASTP in-flight study of leg volumes done by using seg-
mental girth measurements 2^ appear to be consistent with the data from
Skylab. The detailed data are unpublished, but figure 22 is drawn from the
preliminary report.
Preflight
In-flight
L.-— Lift-o(f,
I July 15, 1975
..... I'.vii': lb
^F, POOR QUAi^iTX
Postf light
..-Splashdown,
July 24, 1975,
21:20 GMT
Days
R +1 R+2 R + 3 Rt4 R+5
Days
Figure 22.- Left-leg volumes of ASTP crewmen calculated from segmental girth
measurements; DMP is docking module pilot, CMP is coimnand module pilot.
(Data supplied by Hoffler et al.; see footnote 7, p. 1-3.)
20
See footnote 7 on p. 1-3.
1-35
It must be recognized that volumes also will be changed by tissue atro-
phy or hypertrophy. This slower process with a different basis will be dis-
cussed next.
One could manipulate the raw leg-girth data in innumerable ways to meet
specific needs or curiosity; and for this reason, the raw data on SL-4 limb
girths are included in appendix C, tables C-3 to C-5.
Slow Changes
Slow changes over days to weeks, secondary to the disturbance of fat and
muscle masses, may be caused by inadequate or excessive diet and exercise.
As fluid redistribution appears to be relatively complete in 2 or 3 days
after a change from one-g to weightlessness conditions or vice versa, any
remaining volume changes are probably tissue changes. If a diet is
calorically inadequate, then fat and muscle must be consumed to make up the
difference. In subjects with normal body fat, losses will be in both muscle
and fat, with most of the initial loss occurring in areas where fat is de-
posited (abdomen, buttocks, and subcutaneous areas); but if the percentage of
body fat is initially low or becomes low, then muscle will be consumed. If
exercise to a muscular area is inadequate at a time of inadequate diet, addi-
tional local muscle loss will occur. With diet adequate to maintain body
mass but insufficient exercise, the muscles will atrophy and fat will be de-
posited in the usual areas. ^^ Available Russian data in this area are given
in table 5. These measurements were taken 2 days after flight and should
primarily reflect tissue changes. As will be seen, these data are generally
consistent with the United States experience. Changes seen in flights of
short duration were hardly significant. Both Soyuz and Salyut contained sev-
eral exercise devices, the scheduled use of which was apparently adequate to
maintain upper limbs but not lower. The legs show the major losses of tis-
sue, presumably muscle.
The next available data are from preflight and postflight calf cir-
cumference measurements on all Apollo flights and leg volume measurements on
two Apollo flights made by Hoffler and Johnson^^ as part of the cardio-
vascular evaluation. Table C-6 in appendix C, a summary of these data, shows
a consistent postflight decrease in calf and total leg volume that persists
after the time for fluid redistribution. This decrease represents an appre-
ciable muscle and/or fat loss for relatively short missions.
From the Skylab missions, several sources of data on such changes are
available. Postflight leg and arm volumes and in-flight calf circumferences
were measured on all Skylab missions, and in-flight leg and arm volumes were
measured on SL-4. Herron's preflight and postflight stereophotograrametry
provided an overall survey of body changes (Herron, 1972; Whittle and Herron,
^^There is obviously great individual variation in areas of body-fat
deposition.
22see footnote 2 on p. 1-3.
1-36
TABLE 5.- POSTFLIGHT CHANGES IN CIRCUMFERENCE FOUND IN U.S.S.R. COSMONAUTS
Spacecraft
Flight
duration,
days
Circumference change
on R + 2
Calf,
Hips, Shoulder, Upper
Thigh,
Calf,
mm
mm mm snn ,
percent
percent
percent
-0.3
-3.3
-4.9
a-1.1
a-4.4
a-5.4
Soyuz 3 2 to 5 -2 -7 -5
to 8
Soyuz 9 18 -12 -27 -2
Salyut 24
^Changes measured post mortem.
1977). Although the data cannot be examined in detail here, when they are
considered in view of the following flight conditions, there is a consistent
picture that is compatible with current one-g experience and knowledge. All
data must be interpreted in view of wide variations in individual and mission
diets and exercise.
The SL-2 crewmen clearly had a calorically inadequate diet, and only the
CDR exercised at reasonably adequate levels - albeit with the bicycle
ergometer which was proven inadequate for maintenance of legs consistent with
one-g conditions (see section on strength).
The SL-3 diet was inadequate (see weight section) for the SPT and mar-
ginal for the CDR and the PLT. Good arm exercise equipment was available,
and this activity was undertaken vigorously; all crewmen used the bicycle at
adequate levels on this flight.
The SL-4 diet was adequate to slightly positive for the CDR, inadequate
for the SPT until augmented in the middle of the mission, and marginal for
the PLT. Arm exercise equipment was available and used; the bicycle ergom-
eter and a makeshift treadmill provided fair protection against leg atrophy.
Table 6 is a summary of values from three areas that should reflect diet
and exercise effects on Skylab.'^-' Changes in abdominal girth should be a
rough gauge of changes in body fat. This supposition appears to be valid
■'■^Pref light and postf light arm and leg volumes on SL-2, SL-3, and SL-4
are in appendix C, tables C-3 to C-5 and C-7.
1-37
TABLE 6.- CHANGES IN ARM AND LEG VOLUME
AND WAIST GIRTH OF SKYLAB CREWMEN
Measurement
Arm volume
Leg volume
g
Waist girth
Arm volume
Leg volume
Waist girth
Arm volume
Leg volume
Waist girth
Change
2, percent
Change,
percent /day
CDR
SPT
SL-2 (28
PLT
days)
Mean
1.4
-1.9
-0.4
-0.3
-0.0107
-5.3
-4.8
-6.7
-5.6
-.2
-.9
-5.7
SL-3 (59
-5.1
days)
-3.9
-.139
11.7
-4.6
1.5
-4.9
-0.083
-7.2
-6.4
-4.6
-6.1
-.1033
-4.1
-3.8
SL-4 (84
-1.6
days)
-3.2
-.0542
1.05
-2.49
3.83
0.797
0.0095
-2.2
-2.6
-2.7
-2.5
-.030
1.2
-2.1
-2.4
-1.1
-.013
"Measured on R + 1.
Measured on R + 2.
here, both collectively and
close to caloric balance,
so); and normalized flight
also agree with the genera
appear to reflect effects o
fold improvement observed on
to the first. This effect
postf light changes in leg vo
individually. For example, the SL-4 CDR, who was
gained in abdominal girth (the only crewman to do
averages of girth change (percent change per day)
1 increase of food on each mission. Leg changes
f both food and appropriate exercise, with a ten-
rate of loss during the last mission as compared
is seen better in figure 23, in which average
lume for each Skylab crew are plotted.
Note that after fluid redistribution should have been complete, 2 or 3
days after a return to one-g conditions, crewmen of the 28-day mission still
had a deficit in leg volume of 5+ percent, which persisted until the end of
the measurement period. It is impossible to tell how much of this deficit was
1-38
due to fat loss and how much was due
to muscle loss; but on the basis of
strength studies, much of it must
have been due to muscle loss. The
following 59-day mission, with an
increased amount of food intake and
exercise scheduled, resulted in
essentially the same loss and pat-
tern as that for a mission approxi-
mately half as long. The final 84-
day mission resulted in less than
half the loss, and that was rapidly
regained after flight. Somewhat
more food and a means of heavy leg
exercise were available on this
flight wherein a sharp reduction in
loss was seen. Losses on all three
flights were consistent with
strength changes found after flight.
3 4 5 6 7
Days after recovery
10 11
Figure 23.- Average postf light leg-
volume changes on Skylab missions.
The results of all of these studies of leg mass are consistent with the
following observations. Without protective, heavy exercise, there will be a
rapid loss of leg tissue even on relatively short flights, such as Russian
Soyuz and American Apollo flights. The rate of loss is greater with inade-
quate diet, as on the Apollo and SL-2 missions, and is related to the amount
and type of exercise. (This subject will be dealt with further in the next
section.) A positive view is that such loss of muscle may be prevented by an
adequate diet and a proper amount and type of exercise.
Upper Limbs
Arm volumes derived from segmental girth measurements during Skylab mis-
sions are tabulated in appendix C, tables C-7(a) to C-7(c). Russian data
from the Soyuz 9 to Salyut missions show a relatively greater postf light
decrease in leg girth than in arm girth. This result was observed on SL-2
and SL-4 also; but when one looks at average arm volume changes from mission
to mission, the volume changes do not correlate with food or exercise or
postf light strength changes. Arm volume changes are relatively small and may
be lost in the noise of the measurement apparatus, but this possibility is
doubtful. Even in the absence of arm exercise devices, the ordinary activi-
ties in a spacecraft place moderate demands on upper limbs in contrast to the
unused legs.
Center of Mass
With increases of height and shifts of liquid cephalad, the center of
mass must change. Such changes were documented on SL-4 (Thornton et al
1977).
1-39
Preflight baseline and postflight center-of-gravity measurements were
obtained with a balance board, as shown in figure 24. In flight, a similar
balance point was found without the complication of a board by looping a thin
cord around the subject, who was "floating" freely, and then pulling the cord
at right angles to the body's longitudinal axis to accelerate the crewman.
If the cord were off the center of mass, the crewman would "tilt" during the
acceleration. It was claimed by the crew that the null point, or center of
mass, could be determined within a few millimeters. The use of skin tattoo
as a reference is open to question, but it was felt that in practice this
tattoo would be as stable as some skeletal landmark. The results shown in
figure 25 for the PLT of SL-4 were typical. A slight increase occurred in
the later part of the mission, which may represent a slower shift of fluid
still further cephalad, a loss of leg tissue that was not obvious, or
simply an error. Otherwise, the data seem to be reasonable in direction and
magnitude.
125:
One-q center-of-gravity measurement
VeclorcariJiogram
tattoo
ORIGINAL p\-f; r<^
OF. POOR QUALiry
Zero-q center-of-mass measurement
F-35F-15 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 I | Rtl7
Mission day R *1 R *5
Figure 24.- Measurements used in
center-of-gravity and center-of-
mass determinations.
Figure 25.- Preflight (baseline) and
postflight center-of-gravity measure-
ments of SL-4 PLT obtained with a
balance board. The e.g. /cm. dis-
tances were measured from soles of
crewman's feet.
Methodology of Anthropometric Measurements for Space Flight
Collection of anthropometric data by conventional direct measurements
has many liabilities, especially for space flight. The methodology is tedi-
ous, cumbersome, and time-consuming. Exact shapes cannot be determined by
girth and similar measurements. Stereophotogrammetry, as applied to the body
1-40
by Herron et al., appears to be a most attractive alternative, and its util-
ity and accuracy were successfully demonstrated on Skylab. The technique is
fully described elsewhere (Herron, 1972; Whittle and Herron, 1977). Briefly,
it consists of taking two pairs of photographic plates of the subject, from
which - in the laboratory - a rather involved and complex data reduction
process yields as many spatial points on the body as desired. From this ma-
trix of points, a computer may generate a variety of data. Some examples are
seen in figures 26 and 27. Figure 26 is a single transverse section of the
body generated by the computer from points derived from stereophotogrammetry,
and figure 27 is a composite of such points. Quantitative areas and volumes
may be computed, as may surface areas. A curve of volume as a function of
height may be calculated.
Preflight and postflight studies with the use of this technique were
done in all Skylab missions. Figure 28 shows a plot of volume as a function
of longitudinal axis level for the SL-3 CDR before and after flight. This
plot shows the losses in abdominal area that, when taken with weight losses
and other data, confirm the loss of adipose tissue. Smaller losses of leg
volume may also be seen. Data obtained by using this technique were re-
peatedly compared to directly measured volumes and girths and other quanti-
ties and found to be within their error limits.
The simplicity of obtaining the photographs and the huge amount of data
they contain more than offset the time, complexity, and cost of their analy-
sis. This method, with suitable modifications for in-flight usage, is prob-
ably the method of choice for dimensional studies of size, volume, and shape
10 M
X WIS (cn)
so iO
l£Va (V)i 121.7*
Figure 26.- A single transverse section of the body at shoulder level gener-
ated by a computer from points derived from stereophotogrammetry.
1-41
jr.j
If
II.)
10
J.S
i.i
<r:.::'. :::*■■
'»»'i*f*/ 1».\ 1 1
<■.•■; :
*rrrr.
r"'
■<=■
"■.>c.
.....•>'
<r
..V
<".:■>
^
2.1
r.S 10
I MIS (Cn>
20
Figure 27.- A composite of transverse body sections made from stereo-
photogramraetry.
in the future. The only reservation the author has concerns the attempted
usage of this method for obtaining precise volumetric assessments for density
(specific gravity) determinations; however, continued refinements may make
such precise assessments possible.
I-A2
Applications
Height is discussed in the sec-
ond section of this chapter. Al-
though abdominal changes of this
magnitude would be serious on Earth
for clothing fit, in space the nor-
mal posture will tend to increase
abdominal girth and clothing will be
weightless. However, adjustments
should be available in clothing.
There will be changes in the female
breast area that may also require
consideration for comfort and fit.
1000 r
Predighl, day F - 5
PostfUght, day R + 1
1.2 1,0 .8 .6
Height above floor, m
Figure 28.- Volume as a function of
longitudinal axis level of SL-3
CDR before and after flight.
Except in unusual, closely fit-
ted garments or equipment , the reduc-
tion in leg size should cause no problem. Facial puffiness and stuffy noses
will probably remain a part of space flight, and a probably insignificant
reduction in field of view may occur. The medical scientist should be pri-
marily concerned in this area.
The magnitude of slow tissue changes should be small. Indeed, slow
changes should be largely regarded as a warning that diet and/or exercise is
not at the correct level.
Although there will be a significant cephalad shift of center of mass,
this effect should cause no concern except with respect to maneuvering units
should they have critical balance and control moments.
STRENGTH AND BODY COMPOSITION
SUMMARY
This area is one of the more critical areas for manned space operations
of appreciable duration. Large areas of the body, especially back and legs,
are composed of antigravity muscles normally subjected to loads of up to sev-
eral hundred pounds, several thousand times a day.
In weightlessness, these muscles become virtually unused, and disuse
atrophy will occur rapidly. There were significant changes in strength and
muscle mass following short flights, such as the Apollo and Soyuz flights.
Unprotected, the legs can be expected to atrophy to some level consistent
with in-flight forces but below that required for supporting or transporting
the body under one-g conditions. This loss of strength would cause no prob-
lems in weightlessness but would necessitate special reentry considerations
and a period of rehabilitation after recovery.
1-43
An inadequate diet will increase the deconditioning effects through di-
rect loss of muscle mass, especially in well-conditioned subjects. To prevent
such leg muscle losses, an adequate diet and relatively short periods of
heavy exercise are required. Any muscle must be exercised at or above its
one-g working stress level to prevent loss of function. On the basis of
Russian and Skylab experience, a treadmill with axial body loading to body
weight levels appears to be the best exercise device. Optimum protocols
remain to be demonstrated.
A second undesirable aspect of leg muscle deconditioning is a reduction
in gravity tolerance of the cardiovascular system.
Arms will also suffer some atrophy under weightlessness, but this loss
will be limited because of the relatively heavier workloads they encounter in
weightlessness, where arms must often assume the legs' role in stabilization
as well as their usual role of manipulation. Handgrip strength is little
affected because of the grasping of loads required in space.
Changes in legs begin immediately on exposure to weightlessness; and as
an optimum countermeasure , exercise should begin as early as possible. Al-
though these changes are potentially serious, there is every reason to
believe that they can be prevented by proper diet and exercise .
Strength and Composition Changes
From one-g experience, it could be predicted that placing the human body
in weightlessness would produce a marked decrease in strength and mass of
several major muscle groups, especially major antigravity groups, and would
probably affect neuromuscular function. In an active individual, some 40
percent or more of the body is devoted to opposing gravity in standing and
walking. Large masses of muscle in legs, hips, and back are normally re-
quired to generate forces of hundreds of pounds, thousands of times a day.
Unless engaged in manual labor or rigorous training, the hands, arms, and
shoulders do much less work, which is reflected in their smaller mass. In
weightlessness, the legs become virtually useless and unused except for
"perching" and, occasionally, for pushing off in movement. In contrast, the
hands and arms remain in use, increasingly in some cases, for grasping and
stabilization of the body, as well as for manual manipulations. However, arm
and hand forces in weightlessness are usually much smaller than corresponding
forces on Earth. Under such circumstances, one would expect a relatively
rapid (days to weeks) loss of strength in legs and lower back, followed by
atrophy of these areas, with a relative sparing of strength and mass in arms
and shoulders. Loss of muscle may be further affected by diet. If the diet
is inadequate (see the section on weight changes), especially in crewraembers
with low body fat, the caloric deficit will be made up with body fat and
muscle (Vanderveen and Allen, 1972). Conversely, if the diet is adequate to
maintain body weight, any muscle lost will be replaced with fat deposited in
the areas of the body usually subject to such deposition.
1-44
Loss of muscle mass and function will cause little difficulty during a
flight, for no tasks that require maximum strength of legs and back would be
included in on-orbit operations. It is during reentry and after recovery
that such reductions in function would be noted. Cardiovascular effects of
this loss of leg muscle^^ cannot be covered here but may become critical
under gravitational forces in reentry. Should the crew have to make emer-
gency ground exits after, say, an Orbiter landing, such reductions in muscle
function could also be serious. If preventive measures are not taken in
flight, the crew must expect several days or more of reduced function in the
one-g envirorunent after landing; the time factor will depend upon individual
characteristics and flight duration. Flights as short as 18 days have caused
difficulty in the Russian program (Kakurin, 1971; Parin et al., 1974).
Study and documentation of such changes are far from complete. For one
thing, neither Russian nor American programs have been planned to allow de-
conditioning to follow its normal course, and for good reason. Although the
Russians have placed a great deal of emphasis on this aspect of space physi-
ology and operations and have had active programs of investigation and pre-
vention, there was little effort in this area in American programs until
Skylab. The following three subsections are a resume of programs and data
obtained to date, including Russian data available to the author at this
time.
Strength
The state of the art of the study of strength is such that reiteration
of a few fundamental considerations is in order. All measurement conditions,
including angles, velocities, and types of opposing forces, affect measured
muscle forces. Unless otherwise stated, it is assumed that all Russian meas-
urements were of static maximum-effort forces; but nothing else is known
about them. American handgrip forces were static, but Skylab measurements
were of voluntary maximum-effort isokinetic exertions at a rate of 45°/sec,
which produced forces just below maximum-effort static levels.
Equally important to proper interpretation is knowledge of the subject's
previous and current training program. Russian Soyuz missions had an unknown
exercise regimen that was expanded on Soyuz 9 to include simulated weights,
with exercise periods of approximately 2 hours a day. Exercises included
"running, walking, jumping, squatting" - but only at simulated weights of 20
l^g25 _ aj^(j exercise "of the hands, neck, etc."] for purposes of coordination"
TKakurin, 1971). The Soyuz 11/Salyut mission had an even more vigorous pro-
gram - 3 hours a day with loads of up to 50 kg of body weight and a motor-
driven treadmill that enabled walking. These exercise factors must be used
in interpretation of results. Exercise protocols on Skylab are discussed
later.
^^See footnote 5 on p. 1-3.
■^-^This simulated weight was apparently increased m flight.
1-45
The earliest, easiest to make, and probably least important strength
measurements are those of the static handgrip forces. Figures 29(a) and
29(b) contain a series of measurements from Soyuz 9. Apparently, Russian
investigators felt that neurological inhibition from weightlessness played a
part in the reduction of forces seen in flight here, for on the Soyuz
11/Salyut mission, they compared forces with the man restrained as opposed to
"free" and found no significant differences (Parin et al., 1974). American
Skylab data are summarized in table 7 and show no consistent change except a
slight bilateral loss in the PLT on SL-3, who was an unusually powerful man
accustomed to heavy one-g work.
These results would be consistent with the view that the hands are prob-
ably less affected by space flight than any other muscle group, as a great
deal of grasping and other hand functions are performed in flight. All other
major muscle groups, and especially the lower limbs, suffer rapid disuse
atrophy. This fact was demonstrated in Russian programs and during the Sky-
lab program, which will be described next.
In the Skylab program, a minimum- impact postflight muscle function test
was first instituted; later, according to mission demands, exercises and
exercise devices were added, and the testing was expanded. The result was a
different exercise environment on each flight such that there were three
experiments, with the results of each flight affecting the next. The flights
will be described chronologically.
Evaluation of the right arm and leg was done before and after flight on
all missions with the Cybex Isokinetic Dynamometer. This dynamometer may be
rotated in either direction without resistance until an adjustable limit
speed is reached. Speed cannot be increased above this limit by forces of
686.5
- 70
Pretligh
In -Might
,- Launch
PosMliqh
,.-- Recovery
588.4
- 60
•
•
•
490.3
- 50
■
•
■
•
■
■
392.3
- =-40
~
•
294.2
-S.X
196.1
- 20
-
• Right hand
• Lellhand
98.1
n
- 10
n
"
1 1 1
1
1 1 1
12 16 20 24 28
Time, days
Pfrtliqht
m.i
- 60
-
490.3
- 50
•
■
392.3
- 40
-
294?
o
-
196.1
- 20
-
98.1
n
- 10
-
In-(light
:•.
PosMlight
--Recovery
I Right hand
I Left hand
12 16 20 24
Time, days
(a) Nikolayev.
(b) Sevast 'yanov.
Figure 29.- Handgrip forces as a function of time in we.ightlessness
for Soyuz 9 crewmen.
1-46
I I
I I
r^
o
m r-.
m \£>
00
00
00
O 00
<r 00
O 00
^
w
\0
o
m r^
a> ^
I I
I I
I I
I I
+
z
z
u
§
u
bj
j:
o:
so
tj
3
H^
U
CN
^
O
+
i<:
Cl<
a:
Z
M
3
U
£
S
H
O
z
I I
I I
I I
I I
O O
o \o
^ O
r^ ^
<H r-»
00 m
00 00
CN O
o o
1-t w
i-H .— (
+
— - — '
— ' > —
oi
1
o ^o
Csl \D
rH ^
I
or-- -^r in oo r^
mm <T m <r ro
■<r '^ m cy> i— i oo
o\ \o o ^£3 m I— t
<r 00 r^
(103
(103
(N rg
t— 1 1—1
CN CN
m m
00 00
in m
v£> so
in in
00 r^
<3-
00
m "^
C7> Ov
m -^T
f-4
m
O m
00 ^
00 in
m CO
00
(N
00
m
in CTN
o o
r^
m
o o
00 r^
O
CN
ON
r^ .-H
CN o
f-H r^
00 in
in --H
m CN
m m
<r -J-
<J <T
s
m sD
O \D
so CO
m \o
O o
m o
r-
r^
r^ O
H
to
CL,
M
o
+
oo 00
I
1
1
O O
m o
OS <T\
m r-
O ON
t-H ■ ■
^ CN
m m
I-H ^
ON m
00 00
OO
ON
CN
OS
so so
OS ON
OS
CN 00
CN »J3
m r^
m i-i
P^ (N
CN CN
o
m
w o
1
1^
r^ O
a^ CO
m m
00 00
^3- -J-
vO ^
rH O
ON "^
in m
CN r^
OO 00
m m
ON so
m m
ON
m
CN
.-1
O r^
m CN
u
CQ
\o m
o
•
o
^£> <3
O v£J
o o
m so
o o
o
vn
o m
s
-Q
1
\0 so
00 00
o
o o
.—1 I-H
CM o
o r-*
O O
so SO
-d- m
rH f— 1
r-. CN
00 00
m
O
.-H
f— (
o
t<l4
CN CT\
<■
SO
CN 00
CN O
OO ON
CO vO
O P-
CN
in
so OO
in rn
00 00
en m
o
CN
in
CN
vO
-3- -3-
cT* m
o o
<T m
O r^
in o
so so
CO so
m m
00
in
in
CN rsi
so m
o in
o o
o o
o so
O o
so so
r^ m
O m
r*t m
Ov ON
m ^
CN CN
«— * <— t
m <r
CN rH
rH W
vr so
cys OO
CN ^
o o
CN -3-
■<r m
<— 1 <— t
00 00
m CN
■H rH
ON o
<7N (JS
O tM iH "H
c
a
X
r^ <■
so 00
r-» p^
CN (N
m m
<r o
<r ^
in in
in in
4-1
4-)
4-1
-C *J
J= ij
x: 4J
OOM-i
oo M-i
oo M-i
•H 4J
on hJ
PS J
oi H-J
00 m
.H 00
<r m
T^ OJ -H 01
-^ 00
m cTi
so in
oo ^4-1
•H dJ
PC -1
o in
3 C
U
H
1-47
any magnitude; that is, the constant speed-maximum force of isokinesis is
achieved. Input or muscle forces are continuously ret^orded at a constant
angular rate.
The arrangement used on Skylab missions is shown in figure 30. A crew-
man, after thorough warmup, made 10 maximum-effort full flexions and exten-
sions of the arm at the elbow and of the hip and knee at an angular rate of
45°/sec. A continuous force record was made of each repetition at a rate of
25 mm/sec, and the integral of force - or, under these conditions, work - was
recorded on a second channel (see fig. 31).
11 — »l_Ii
Figure 30.- Arrangement used for Skylab postf light muscle function test.
800.7-
180
5 120
£ 60
n
--^T
z 533 8 -
-44:__ t__ t'':^. t'^-it"'
- 30
- „?5
o
o
- i^o
Q-
- 15
10
•
•
S
1 '^lt~^ '" 133.4
A A ^t -
£ 266.9-
i • .
::S:f!;:-:::::r*""-===^'s- ^-rti"" ?'"-^
^»— « . • • -
■
., i,.. < "Ht" 'S a
A A A a
•S 89.0
* ■ ■ A
* ' 1 ■ !
• • * • • f J
T.__. IT I """I °-
.1 . ,' 4--^^,...
.' "t 1:;'""'"
^.. __ 1 _. . _^_^ ^ r
^
i
j ..:; ::::;:: ":;r
Repetilion number
•■ ' ' . ■■ '
:;;='::::: i:;::: ;;■ :*
.11 ( ,:: : ;' X
Preflight • ■
Time
Postllighl, day R 1 9 A «
Figure 31.- Recording of right-leg
muscle forces of the SL-3 backup
PLT.
Figure 32.- A plot of peak arm forces
of the SL-3 CDR from preflight and
postf light curves.
1-48
Machine errors are small, 2 to 3 percent or less. At lower angular
rates, the test gives a measurement of strength comparable to that achieved
in the more conmionly used isometric testing but has the advantage of re-
cording this force throughout the whole range of motion, as well as allowing
a number of repetitions for statistical purposes. It is sensitive enough to
show small changes in performance which may occur in days.
A great deal of information is contained in the recordings made, but
only one quantity will be used, the peak force of each repetition. Use of a
single point on the tension curve to represent the entire curve may be open
to criticism, especially for the leg, in which a number of muscles are in-
volved. However, for the investigators' purposes, the author believes that
this method provides a valid measure of strength of the muscles tested.
A plot of such peak points from a preflight and a postflight curve is
shown in figure 32. The strength for a given movement is taken as the aver-
age of 10 repetitions. As can be seen, a fatigue decrement is present and
may vary. It is included in the strength figure by virtue of averaging the
10 repetitions.
On SL-2, only the bicycle ergometer was used for in-flight exercise.
The CDR used it in the normal fashion and was the only person on Skylab to
use it in the hand-pedal mode. He also was the only person in this crew to
exercise at rates comparable to those of later missions.
On this mission, testing was performed 18 days before launch and 5 days
after flight. It was recognized that these testing times were too far
removed from the time of flight, but it was the best that could be done under
schedule constraints.
By the time muscle testing was done on day 5, there had been a signifi-
cant recovery in function; however, a marked decrement remained. The decre-
ment in leg extensor strength approached 25 percent; the arms had suffered
less but also had marked losses (see figs. 33 and 34). The CDR's arm ex-
tensors had no loss (fig. 33) since he presumably used these muscles in hand-
pedaling the bicycle. This result illustrates a crucial point in muscle
conditioning: to maintain the strength of a muscle, it must be stressed to
or near the level at which it will have to function. Leg extensor muscles
must develop forces of hundreds of pounds, whereas arm extensor forces are
measured in tens of pounds. Forces developed in pedaling the bicycle ergom-
eter are typically tens of pounds and are totally incapable of maintaining
leg strength. The bicycle ergometer is an excellent machine for aerobic
exercise and cardiovascular conditioning, but it simply cannot develop either
the type or level of forces required to maintain strength for walking under
one-g conditions.
Immediately after SL-2, work was started on devices to provide adequate
exercise to arms, trunk, and legs. A mass-produced commercial device, called
Mini Gym (designated MK-l), was extensively modified. A centrifugal brake
arrangement approximated isokinetic action on this device. Only exercises
which primarily benefited arms and trunk were available from this device, as
1-49
shown in figure 3.5. Forces transmitted to the legs were higher than those
from the ergometer, but they were still limited to an inadequate level since
forces could not exceed the maximum strength of the arms, a fraction of leg
strength.
A second device, designated MK-II, consisted of a pair of handles
between which up to five extension springs could be attached. By using this
device with its full complement of accessories, a maximum force of 364.8 N
per meter (25 lb per foot) of extension could be developed.
"
5L-2 • CDR
SL-3 ■ SPT
* PLT
>
^
^
W-^^^--
Vvx -^^^
\ X. ^ "^
\ X. ^ ^
\ \ X "^
\\^-. ^-^^
\ \ ^ ^
\ \ V ^
\ X "^ ***•
_
\ \ ^ ^
\ ^ ^ '^
\ • >. >».
\ ^ ^"
\ ***•
\ N.
\ N,
\ X
>• ^
» V
•v
X
N
28
Time, days
Figure 33.- A plot of the postf light
changes in arm forces on SL-2 and
SL-3. Positive values represent
gain; negative values, loss.
Figure 34.- A plot of the postflight
changes in leg forces on SL-2 and
SL-3. Positive values represent
gain; negative values, loss.
1-50
A-1 A-2
E-1 E-2
Figure 35.- MK-I exerciser positions.
These two devices were flown on SL-3, and food and time for exercise
were increased in flight. The crew performed many repetitions per day of
their favorite maneuvers on the MK-I and, to a lesser extent, on the MK-II .
Also, the average amount of work done on the bicycle ergometer was more than
doubled on SL-3, with all crewmen participating actively.
The results of muscle testing of SL-3 crewmen were markedly different
from the results for the SL-2 crew.
Looking at changes in amn forces on SL-3, one sees complete preservation
of extensor function, in contrast to SL-2 results (see fig. 33). The SPT
showed a marked gain in arm strength. This consequence is the result of
putting a good distance runner, which he was, on the equivalent of a weight-
lifting program.
Looking now at changes in leg function, in figure 34, one sees a differ-
ent picture. Results for only two SL-3 crewmen are shown since the CDR suf-
fered a recurrence of a back strain from a lurch resulting from a roll of the
recovery ship - possibly another demonstration of the hazard of muscle
deconditioning.
Some device which would enable walking and running under forces equiva-
lent to gravity appeared to be the ideal answer to this problem. This need
had long been recognized; and immediately after SL-2, work was started on a
treadmill for SL-4. As mission preparation progressed, the launch weight of
the SL-4 vehicle became crucial; so the final design was simulation of a
treadmill in response to weight constraints. The final weight of the device
was 1.6 kg (3.5 lb).
The "treadmill," shown in figure 36, consisted of an aluminum-Teflon
walking surface attached to the isogrid floor. Four rubber bungees, provid-
ing an equivalent weight of approximately 80 kg (175 lb), were attached to a
shoulder and waist harness. By angling the bungees, an equivalent to a slip-
pery hill is presented to the subject, who must climb it. High loads were
placed on some leg muscles, especially in the calf, and fatigue occurred rap-
idly; so the device could not be used for significant aerobic work.
1-51
On SL-4, the crew used the bi-
cycle ergometer at essentially the
same rate as on SL-3, as well as the
MK-I and MK-II exercisers. In addi-
tion, they typically performed 10
minutes per day of walking, jumping,
and jogging on the treadmill. Food
intake had again been increased.
Bungee
Onboard harness
Teflon sheet
Even prior to muscle testing,
it was obvious that the SL-4 crew
was in surprisingly good condition.
They stood and walked for long
periods without apparent difficulty
on the day after recovery, in con-
trast to the experience of the other
crews after the earlier missions.
Results of the testing confirmed
that a surprisingly small loss in
leg strength occurred after almost 3
months in weightlessness. A summary
of the exercise and strength
testing, shown in averaged values
for the three missions, is depicted
in figures 37 and 38. One point to be noted is the relatively small loss in
arm strength as compared to legs in all missions. This result is reasonable,
for in space ordinary work provides relatively greater loads for the arms;
the legs receive virtually no effective loading. With the MK-I and MK-II ex-
ercisers, SL-4 arm strength increased in flexion and was minimal in
extension.
Figure 36.- Skylab treadmill arrange-
ment used to test muscle function.
Size is another common measure of muscle condition and has been dis-
cussed in the preceding section (see fig. 25).
There was a 4.7- to 9-fold reduction in the rate of loss of leg extensor
strength, leg volume, lean body mass, and total body mass from SL-2 to SL-4.
One might argue that this reduction simply represents some kind of
equilibrium with increasing mission duration, but this conclusion is not
consistent with the data in table 8, which show absolute losses.
As shown in figure 39, SL-4 crewmen demonstrated a marked improvement
over previous Skylab crews with regard to losses of weight, leg strength, and
leg volume. There can be little doubt that use of the added MK-I and MK-II
improved the arm performance of the crewmen on SL-2 and SL-3 and equally
little doubt that use of the SL-4 treadmill sharply reduced loss of leg
strength and mass, since there was negligible increase in leg exercise with
other devices on SL-4.
However, it must be recognized that food was another variable present.
Virtually all nutritionists recognize that metabolic losses in normal sub-
jects are mixed; i.e., both fat and muscle are lost. Vanderveen and Allen
1-52
+ 15
_+10
o
^*5
-10-
'-'-^L-2 • Flexors
— SL-3 ■ Extensors
— SL-4
28
SL-2
Time, days
59
SL-3
SL-4
.a Ergometer
■I plus
S MK-I and springs -
a plus
5 treadmill
I I
31.3 65.0 71.0
Average ergometer vKork, W-mln/kg
I I I
1878 3900 «60
Average ergometer work, J/kg
Figure 37.- A plot of the average arm
strength changes on Skylab missions.
Flexors
Extensors
SL-4
S MK-I and springs
1 plus
^ treadmill
I
31.3 65.0 71.0
Average ergometer work, W-min/kg
( I I
1878 3900 4260
Average ergometer work. J/kg
Figure 38.- A plot of the average leg
strength changes on Skylab missions.
(1972) deliberately reduced caloric intake during a one-g chamber test simu-
lation of space-flight conditions, using subjects chosen on the basis of
being as equivalent as possible to the astronaut population. They found an
almost pure muscle loss.
The Russian experience followed similar but much more elaborate lines,
which included prolonged bed rest and supine tests on a motor-driven mill
flown on Soyuz 11/Salyut, with elaborate force-loading suits to simulate
gravity. Hours per day were spent on the treadmill, but at a load of only 50
kg of equivalent weight, in contrast to the 80 kg on Skylab with 70-kg
crewmen for 12 to 15 minutes a day.
Some measured parameters from Russian missions are shown in table 9.
According to these data, there is a consistent increase in loss of "tone" and
strength in the legs, as compared to small arm losses, even on the 3- to 5-
day missions. This loss increased sharply on the 18-day Soyuz 9 flight, in
spite of prolonged, lightly loaded exercises. Again, such exercise was
apparently sufficient for arms, which showed an increase in tone and neg-
ligible .loss in girth and in wrist strength. It is interesting to note that
the right, presumably dominant, wrist lost strength, whereas the left wrist
1-53
>^
■H
QO
U
^ 4-1
•H
M
"^ J=
(0
U
C 00
"O
X
-H -i-t
0)
? s
.-H in
13 v^ w w
(u e
o. eg
CO oa + ;>%
.H ^^ oi ts
C (0 O 4J
CT» CTi .-H
00 .-I i-H
S 3
^ S
fT] T3 I a
g £
1^ ^
+ >^
E 05 TJ
to OO-H
C *J C r-
00 ••-( »n u o
00 w >%
1-54
Day 28
SL-2
Day 59
SL-3
Day 84
SL-4
4800
: 3600
r 5^80
'e
£ 2400
E
8.
03
= 1200
.60
s
ni
S 40
E
8.
Oi
>.20
-3
-4
-5
Bicycle
ergometer
Bicycle
ergometer
plusMK-I
and MK-n
exercisers
Bicycle
ergometer
plusMK-I
and MK-n
exercisers
plus
treadmill
- 5
10
m Weight
I I Leg strength
Leg «)lume
15 .2
-20
-25
30
Figure 39.- Exercise-related quantities on Skylab missions,
gained. Although it did not appear statistically significant, one had the
impression from Skylab handgrip measurements that the same thing happened
there. The author suspects that the nondominant hand was used for grasping
and stabilization, whereas the dominant hand was used for manipulation. The
in-flight death of the Salyut crew makes functional comparisons impossible.
Another single data point on muscle change was obtained on the ASTP, a
9-day mission (see table 10). It may be a coincidence that crewman 2 lost no
leg volume, but he was provided with a shoulder harness which enabled high-
force leg exercises to be performed with a rope/capstan device.
Walking
Changes in muscle function were also reflected in postflight gait and
posture. There was a general tendency toward hunched posture with slightly
lowered head and a "shuffling" gait, with a marked aversion to the upright
1-55
TABLE 10.- LEFT-LEG VOLUME CHANGES OF ASTP CREWMEN
Crewman
Pref light
volume,
liters
Postflight
(R+2) volume,
liters
A volume,
liters
A volume,
percent
1 (ACDR)
7.8
7.40
-0.40
-5.1
2 (DMP)
7.5
7.50
3 (CMP)
8.1
7.75
-.35
-4.3
posture, especially in the first two Skylab crews. The last crew tolerated
upright posture without apparent difficulty just 18 hours after recovery.
Unfortunately, the gait and posture were not documented in the American pro-
gram; but Russian cinephotographic documentation (Parin et al., 1974) showed
a marked slowing of all phases of the walking gait (and especially the time
with both feet on the ground), an effect which would be consistent with
American observations. This result indicates reduced strength in the trunk
and legs, possibly complicated by neuromuscular changes.
Body Composition Changes
Other indicators of muscle (and fat) changes are lean body mass determi-
nations. These values were obtained on Skylab missions by means of standard
radioisotopic dilution studies. ^6 Results are tabulated in table 11. As
these studies were made on recovery day (R + O) , before fluid redistribution
and replacement were complete, some degree of dehydration was present, which
would have the effect of decreasing both lean body mass and lean body mass
percentage. Data taken on day R+2 would have been more representative
here, but the R + data are consistent with other muscle data.
The data show a consistent loss of lean body mass but a rate of loss re-
duced with each mission. Lest someone interpret this result as some kind of
adaptation, note that the crew of the shortest mission had the greatest lean
body mass loss and the last crew had the least strength loss. Only one indi-
vidual gained lean body mass (SL-3 SPT) . He was the lightest individual; and
he used the in-flight arm exercise devices enough to increase his arm
strength by 15 percent, in contrast to his one-g regimen of running only.
In spite of this loss of lean body mass, the percentage of lean body
mass increased in all crewmen but two, a result indicating the inadequacy of
the diet to maintain fat levels even in individuals with body-fat percentages
as low as 9 percent.
^^ata from studies done by Phil Johnson, Baylor Medical College, and
Carolyn Leach, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center.
1-56
Crewman LBM, kg, on -
F - 1 R +
CDR
56.6
TABLE 11.- CHANGES IN LEAN BODY MASS
ON SKYLAB MISSIONS
[By isotopic determination]
(a) By crewman
A LBM LBM, percent, on
kg percent F - 1 R +
SL-2
55.9
-0.7
-1.2
91.9
SL-3
SL-4
(b) By mission
92.7
A LBM, percent
0.8
SPT
67.4
65.7
-1.7
-2.5
87.0
"88.9
1.9
PLT
71.5
68.5
-3.0
-4.2
88.3
90.1
1.8
CDR
58.2
57.4
-0.8
-1.4
85.0
88.7
3.7
SPT
53.6
54.2
.6
1.1
87.0
92.2
5.2
PLT
73.4
71.1
-2.3
-3.1
84.6
83.1
-1.5
CDR
57.4
56.2
-1.2
-2.1
84.3
82.5
-1.8
SPT
62.3
61.5
-.8
-1.3
87.4
87.8
.4
PLT
63.0
61.8
-1.2
-1.9
91.3
93.9
2.6
Mission Duration, days
SL-2 28
SL-3 5y
SL-4 84
kg
kg/ day
-1.80
6.43x10
-.83
1.41x10
-1.07
1.27x10
Meai
n A LBM
percent
percent/day
•2
-1.50
-5.36x10"^
•2
-2.47
-4.19x10"^
•2
-.40
-.48x10"^
LBM divided by body weight times 100.
Measured on R + 1.
1-57
i
The crewmen maintaining body fat are notable. The SL-4 CDR was the only
crewman not losing body weight, a result indicating that some lost muscle was
replaced with fat. Although the SL-3 PLT lost body weight, he was large and
unusually well muscled and obviously lost this muscle at a rate greater than
the rate of loss of body weight and thereby maintained his body fat.
Each succeeding mission showed an improvement in rate of loss of lean
body mass and rate of change in lean body mass percentage, which can only be
attributed to generally improved nutrition and exercise on each succeeding
flight.
Applications
This subject of loss of strength and muscle mass is one of the more im-
portant aspects of manned space flight, especially for the prolonged missions
of the future requiring numerous personnel for manual tasks such as structure
assembly and similar operations. The concern is not with operations in
space - for there is no reason to think that even unprotected muscle function
will ever fall below that routinely required in space flight - but with
capabilities on Earth after a return from space flight. Without protection,
serious muscle disuse atrophy will begin in the first few days of weightless-
ness in the major antigravity groups and continue to a functional equilibrium
far below that compatible with erect stance and locomotion on Earth.
Although this aspect is not discussed, such atrophy will seriously degrade
gravity tolerance as well. Thus, unless one is prepared to accept special
reentry precautions, followed by an extensive rehabilitation program on
return to a one-g environment, adequate in-flight diet and exercise force
levels compatible with those required for walking must be provided. This
problem of prevention is primarily one for the life scientists; however, the
measurements and assessments of muscle condition required are much more
familiar to the anthropometrist . A cooperative effort by the anthropom-
etrist, the exercise physiologist, and the industrial physician may be in
order.
FUTURE
Unfortunately, the role of anthropometrics, other than when forced to
the surface by a specific problem such as suit fit or cockpit layout, has
been largely ignored. This neglect cannot be continued unless a long, pain-
ful, and inefficient period of trial and error can be afforded in the space
program as man expands his time and efforts in space. The pitiably
incomplete data informally gathered and presented here should be enough to
stimulate better future efforts. Even this small amount of data has been
enough to show the potential impact of weightlessness on man/machine design.
It was also enough to redirect the efforts and thinking in several life sci-
ence areas, especially the cardiovascular area.
1-58
For this reason, a few NASA investigators are redoubling their efforts
in several areas. Most urgent, these investigators believe, is development of
improved methods of data collection, especially with regard to time and sim-
plicity, particularly for dynamic data such as strength measurements. A
series of developments is underway that, hopefully, will enable rapid, auto-
matic recording and analysis of size, shape, and motion on Earth or in space,
of nude or space-suited crewmen. These data will be stored and automatically
interfaced with computational facilities so that man may be synthetically in-
terfaced with any desired machine or situation.
The optimum interface may then be tested in space by this improved data
gathering and instrumentation, and both models and machines will be improved.
Several pioneers have been at work for some time now, showing alternatives to
the complications and limitations of tapes, goniometers, static weights, and
mockups, including "Combiman" at AMRL, Herron with his application of ster-
eophotogrammetry to the body, and Perrine with isokinetic strength testing,
as well as many others. The NASA investigators hope to follow and possibly
aid their trailblazing and sincerely hope to be joined by professional
anthropometrists more experienced than themselves in investigating this new
area of weightlessness, for it is an exciting place to be - and there is both
need and opportunity aplenty.
1-59
REFERENCES
DePuky, P. 1935. "Physiological Oscillation of the Length of the Body," Acta
Orthop. Scand. , 6:338-347.
Gauer, 0. H., and J. P. Henry 1963. "On the Circulatory Basis of Fluid
Volume Control," Physiol. Rev. . 43:423-481.
Herron, R. E. 1972. "Biostereometric Measurement of Body Form," Yearbook of
Physical Anthropometry , p. 16.
Kakurin, L. 1. 1971. Medical Research Performed on the Flight Program of the
Soyuz-Type Spacecraft . NASA TT F-14026.
Kazarian, L. 1975. "Creep Characteristics of the Human Spinal Column,"
Orthopedic Clinics of North America , 6:3-18.
Parin, V. V., et al., eds., 1974. Weightlessness (Medical and Biological
Research ), Meditsina Press (Moscow), NASA TT F-16105.
Sawin, Charles F., Arnauld E. Nicogossian, et. al. 1977. "Pulmonary Function
Evaluation During and Following Skylab Space Flights," Biomedical
Results From Skylab , pp. 388-394, NASA SP-377.
Simons, John C. 1964. "An Introduction to Surface-Free Behavior,"
Ergonomics , 7:22-36.
Thornton, W. E. 1973. Some Medical Aspects of SMEAT, Skylab Medical
Experiments Altitude Test . NASA TM X-58115, p. 198.
Thornton, William E., and John Ord 1977. "Physiological Mass Measurements in
Skylab," Biomedical Results From Skylab , pp. 175-182, NASA SP-377.
Thornton, William E., and John A. Rummel 1977. "Muscular Deconditioning and
its Prevention in Space Flight," Biomedical Results From Skylab , pp.
191-197, NASA SP-377.
Thornton, William E., G. Wyckliffe Hoffler, and John A. Rummel 1977.
"Anthropometric Changes and Fluid Shifts," Biomedical Results From
Skylab , pp. 330-338, NASA SP-377.
Vanderveen, J. E., and T. H. Allen 1972. "Energy Requirements of Man in
Living Weightless Environment," Life Sciences and Space Research , XIV,
COSPAR, Akademie-Verlag (Berlin).
Verigo, V. 1976. "Dependence of Human Body Weight Loss on Space Flight
Duration," Kosmicheskaya Biologiya i Aviakosmichkaya Meditsina , 10:58-
61, U.S. Joint Publications Research Services, JPRS L/6189.
Whittle, Michael W. , Robin Herron, and Jaime Cuzzi 1977. "Biostereometric
Analysis of Body Form," Biomedical Results From Skylab , pp. 198-202,
NASA SP-377.
1-60
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
It was originally intended to include all anthropometric data available
from space flight in this chapter and the accompanying appendixes, but it
soon became obvious that more had been collected than originally allowed for.
Although the bibliographic references contain additional data, a good number
of known sources were not included. Investigators with appropriate require-
ments and NASA clearance are directed to the following sources for further
information.
1. The Life Sciences Directorate, code DA, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Texas 77058, which has an archival section in which all
zero-g data will eventually be assembled.
2. William Thornton, M.D., code CB, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Texas 77058, who has most of the raw data, including all
anthropometric photographs, complete strength measurement curves, and some
related one-g records.
3. Dr. R. E. Herron, Biostereometrics Laboratory, Texas Institute for
Rehabilitation and Research, 1333 Moursund Ave., Houston, Texas 77025, who
has the original stereophotogrammetric work.
4. Dr. Wycliff Hoffler, code DB53, NASA John F. Kennedy Space Center,
Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899, who has ASTP and other leg-girth data.
5. John Jackson and Jeri Brown, code EW5, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Texas 77058, who have a variety of data, including zero-g
and water-immersion studies.
1-61
APPENDIX A
WEIGHT CHANGES OF SPACE-FLIGHT CREWMEN
In table A-1, anthropometric weight changes of U.S. crewmen of the
Mercury-Redstone (MR), Mercury-Atlas (MA), Gemini-Titan (GT), Apollo-Saturn
(AS), and Apollo-Soyuz Test Project (ASTP) missions are listed. The nude
weight of the designated pilot (PLT), command pilot (CP), commander (CDR),
command module pilot (CMP), lunar module pilot (LMP), Apollo commander
(ACDR), or docking module pilot (DMP) was taken immediately before and after
each mission.
In table A-2, weight changes of U.S.S.R. cosmonauts are shown for the
Vostok 1 to 6, Voskhod 1 and 2, Soyuz 3 to 9, and Soyuz 11/Salyut missions.
In table A-3, body weights of all Skylab crewmen measured daily during
the Skylab 2 (SL-2), Skylab 3 (SL-3), and Skylab 4 (SL-4) missions are pre-
sented, together with a range of pref light and postf light measurements. The
day of year (DOY), calendar date, and mission day (MD) are listed for con-
venience. The designator F - 30 represents 30 days before lift-off, R +
represents recovery day, R + 16 represents 16 days after recovery, and so
forth. The crewman designators are CDR, PLT, and science pilot (SPT). Ex-
cept for first shipboard weights or as otherwise noted, all ground-based
measurements were made of the nude crewmen after the first urination of the
day and before breakfast.
In-flight mass measurements were made with use of the body mass meas-
uring device (BMMD). A fifth-order curve fit was used on DOY 151 calibration
data for SL-2, a second-order curve fit on DOY 211 calibration data for SL-3,
and a fourth-order curve fit on DOY 211 calibration data for SL-4. Where
appropriate, corrections have been made for clothing weight and one-g
conditions .
1-62
in CN
f^ 00
I I
o
o ^
o
CN CO
CM m
I I
r ^
00 <r
I I
•^ o
O
O --H
in in
<
•-I O
r^ O
in \D
00 r^
o- <r
XI vO
t-^ r^
o p^
00
in
m O
in in
r- O
O u^
O u^
r^ O
O o
m
1—1
CO -<r
in v£)
— 1 i— 1
in r^
CN <J
in in
i-H •— 1
.—1 .— 1
^ CM
iH .—1
CM >— t
in in
.-H .-t
O ^
.—1 I-H
00
CN
r^
r- •<r
O u^
a> 00
O \D
r^ a^
oo u-^
(Ti CM
a\ CM
m in
.-H f-)
p^
o
o
o
00
r^ r^
00 vo
O CM
o ^
^ CM
CN CM
\0 r-^
^ O
r^
CM
-;
-^l
CO
r^
CM cn
ro m
f^ CT>
00 ON
CO CO
r*i CT\
a^ C7^
m m
CJN CN
fO 00
CO -3"
vD <r
00 in
CM in
r^ f^
in m
in CM
in in
^ m
en m
m m
m en
m m
m en
en en
U -J
O, f-.
C H
in
in
in
^
»J o ■•
>H
in
in
j: -H ti
00 iJ £
o
o
<r
<T
•H (TJ ••
o
o
o
o
-H U 01
pL. 3 >>
o
o
d
<=
o
o
^
I
I
3
1
H
1
1
H
1
f-i
1
E-i
O
O
O
O
O
1-63
m ^ 00
^-i r*^ ir\
r^ <N vo
00 CN
<r oo
00
00
3 ^ rH ^
^ in inin inm oOOf^f^u^OOu^
<rof~ oooo? u-iu-iS tNino ooi-rH ^rr-tN -^ ^ '^
iSi J^ ww"^ >I,wvl^ wd-T^ Ifl^w
CT^mr^I covooo inmp^ ^inin ^cN<r a\f^r-- f-^o^o
^<fri rirn^ rjrjc^l ^tM<r ntnl ^min ~?"f'?
7 I I 111 II III III
Joo ^ "t'u? "^i" ^^"^^ "^
mr^ST o?oo roiNr? ooo^(-l ^CT\^o inooo t-ivoov
oo-^<T ^ovorn inr^in viDinsO voinvo -:r-J-* vooo<r
^rt,H ^f-i^ ,-1,-iw ,-1^^ '-'^^ ctwCi cicJci
^r^vO OO-^vO ^(N-J -jcnty, <r^ri O0^i/-t CN<T0O
vDvOI-^ !-g<Tt-g CT^00O^ ^CCMCl <r<Nim u-,r--<^ ;?SC'^
00>OvO r-r-vO >£li^vO r^r^r~. r^r^r^ >c.nvO l^00>£>
^ ro ro tn m O O
<Tr-^vO S^CNr^ O^0OO^ rHinr»1 (NvOr^ (J\.ncN '^'^■'5
cj\min vor^^ inr^in r^vci^ r^ \D ^ <T inin r^ovin
^^,-H ^^^ ^,H^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^
O«^oo \00<r rHi^r-H mTOm o (*ir- r-^ -3-c^i mf*^oo
OO^O vDCO^ CSOtN t^^JOD 00 mm P-OC?^ SSI^
oor-^r^ r^r^^O P^COI^ p^r^r^ r,r^r^ vor^vo oooor^
<:
U
O ON o
r> M3 r-.
r- r^ \D
rH (St Csl
r- r- r^
csi a> (N
r^ ^o f*^
1—1
^ o
^ ^ cr.
r-. r-^ -^
00 (n 00
00 ro r--
en a^ <T>
CT» fo o\
r~)
<y-> 00
0^
(^4 in
(^ ^£) u-i
r^ in r-
r- r- r^
r*- o CN
P^ OD P^
O (SI CN
00 00 00
(N m CN
00 r*- 00
O
CO
O r-
00 r^
00
O ^ -^
QO CO r-.
(1) 1-1
00 5i
g fc &
86 3
g & |:
g^&
O O eJ
g ^fe
fci £:
ID CJ hJ
O
<N
o
1-64
\0 in \£)
On <r
t-H n
CO -J-
<3- m
rg in lt-i
(^ r^ CN
o
o
O
oo
O
in
in
in
in
fNl
in
CsJ
-JD
in
P^
^
fN
^
rg
t
1
1
1
in
1
On
1
rg
1
1
^
<r
in
1
-<r
•<r
-J-
ro
<r
tn
■^
as
in
fN
^
o>
1-^
o
yD
o
in
^
i-H
CN
m
CM
CN
<T
w
^
CN
CN
GO
o
O
O
O
o
o
in
O
in
00
in
CO
^
in ^
as
in
.-1
— 1
in
m
^
^
as
(N
in
^
so
O
o -^
so r-.
—1 — (
to
a.
^
^3-
m
as
-H
r^
in
in
in
.— (
so
cr>
so
00 so
vO
§
CO
CN
o
m
00
in
o
<T
CM
-
CN r-^
4-1
s:
00
■H
l4-l
o
00
O
in
so
O
.-H
CO
1-H
o
CN
in
1—*
o
in
in
m
o
■—1
O
O
\0
O
in
sO
in
as
so
00
m 'O
\0 r^
CN
CO
CO
CN
m
(N
as
<r
O
m
r.
00
as
C30 CN
-J-
a\
O
00
en
m
CX)
vC
o
00
in
so
<r o
r-- CO
1-t
O ^
CN
o oo
r^ \o
O i-H
CN
.-4 as
CN O .-H
r^ r^ r^
m
00 rn
OS
.—1 r^
m
00 so
as
so cn
o^ <— 1 tn
o
00
r^ o
r^ 00
CN
00
as CM
in
P--
r^ 00
CN
00
.-H in
oo r-.
(^ as G
oo r^ 00
CO CT. .-H f-l
^fe
e: &
& &
1-65
TABLE A-2.- WEIGHT CHANGES OF U.S.S.R. COSMONAUTS
Flight
Flight duration,
days:hr
Crewman
Weigh
Preflight
:, kg
Postflight
Weight
kg
change
Percent
Vostok 1
00:02
Gagarin
NA^
NA
NA
^••^-0.7
Vostok 2
01:01
Titov
NA
NA
NA
^■^-3.9
Vostok 3
03:22
Nikolayev
NA
NA
NA
''•^-2.5
Vostok 4
02:23
Popovich
NA
NA
NA
^'•=-2.7
Vostok 5
04:23
Bykovskiy
NA
NA
NA
-=-3.5
Vostok 6
02:23
Tereshkova
NA
NA
NA
'^-3.2
Voskhod 1
00:24
Komarov et al.
NA
NA
^•''-2.5 to -
-3 NA
Voskhod 2
01:02
C-Belyayev
NA
NA
^-1.0
NA
A-Leonov
NA
NA
"-.9
NA
Soyuz 3
03:23
Beregovoy
NA
NA
-2.4
NA
Soyuz 4
02:23
Shatalov
NA
NA
-4.0
NA
^02:00
Yeliseyev
NA
NA
-2.0
NA
*02:00
Krunov
NA
NA
-2.0
NA
Soyuz 5
03:46
Volynov
NA
NA
-2.4
NA
Soyuz 6
04:23
Shonin
Kubasov
NA
NA
NA
NA
-2.4
-2.1
NA
NA
Soyuz 7
04:23
Filipchenko
Gorbatko
Volkov
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
-3.9
-2.0
-2.4
NA
NA
NA
Soyuz 8
04:23
Shatalov
Yeliseyev
NA
NA
NA
NA
-2.2
-3.6
NA
NA
Soyuz 9
17:16
Nikolayev
65.0
62.3
-2.7
8-4.15
17:16
Sevast 'yanov
68.0
64.5
-3.5
8-5.14
Soyuz 11/Salyut
24:00
Dobrovol'skiy
81.0
77.1
-3.9
8-4.8
Volkov
83.3
80.56
-2.74
8-3.3
Patsayev
74.6
70.87
-3.73
8-5.0
NA = not available.
Measured 24 hours after flight.
c
Source: unpublished report.
Range of losses.
^Source: Kakurin (1971).
Crewmen launched on Soyuz 5 and returned on Soyuz 4.
8source: Parin et al. (1974).
1-66
DOY Date,
1973
TABLE A-3.- DAILY BODY WEIGHTS OF SKYLAB CREWMAN
(a) SL-2
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT PLT
Preflight
"115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
121*
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
13»*
135
136
137
138
139
11*0
ll^l
11*2
ll*3
lUU
U5
Apr. 25
Apr. 26
Apr. 27
Apr. 28
Apr. 29
Apr. 30
1
2
3
It
5
6
7
May-
May
May-
May
Hay
May-
May
May 8
May 9
May 10
May 11
May 12
May 13
May ll*
May 15
May l6
May 17
May 18
May 19
May 20
May 21
May 22
May 23
May 2k
May 25
F - 30
F - 29
F - 28
F - 27
F - 26
F - 25
F - 2U
F - 23
F - 22
F - 21
F - 20
F - 19
F - 18
F - 17
F - 16
F - 15
F - ll*
F - 13
F - 12
F - 11
F - 10
F - 9
F - 8
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
62.8
(138.5
) 78.6
(173.3)
62.5
(137.8
) 78.5
(173.0)
62.5
(137.8
) 78. U
(172.8)
62.5
(137.8
) 78.1*
(172.8)
62.1
(137.0
) 77.8
(171.5)
62.1
(137.0
) 77.9
(171.8)
62.8
(138.5
77.8
(171.5)
62.8
(138.5
78.0
(171.9)
62.3
(137.3
) 77.8
(171.5)
62.0
(136,8
77.6
(171.0)
61.8
(136.3
77.5
(170.9)
62.8
(138.5
78.2
(172.5)
62.6
(138.0
77.8
(171.5)
62.5
(137.8
78.2
(172.5)
61.9
(136.5
77.5
(170.8)
61.9
(136.5
77.9
(171.8)
62.3
(137.3
77.6
(171.0)
62.3
(137.3
77.5
(170.8)
62.1
(137.0
77.8
(171.5)
62.0
(136.8
77.6
(171.0)
61.6
(135.8
77.2
(170.3)
62.0
(136.8
77.6
(171.0)
62.1
(137.0
N
.D.
61.6
(135.8
77.8
(171.5)
62.0
(136.8
78. U
(172.8)
62.0
(136.8
78.1
(172.3)
62,5
(137.8)
78.1*
(172.8)
N
.D.
N
.D.
61.7
(136.0)
77.5
(170.8)
62.0
(136.8)
77.7
(171.3)
61.9
(136.5)
77.2
(170.3)
81. U
81.3
(179.5
(179.3
81.0 (178.5
81,
80,
80
80.3
80.2
(178.5
(178.0
(178.3
(178.3
(177.0
(177.0
(176.8
79.9 (176.3
80.2 (176.8
(176.3
(176.0
(17U.5
(175.5
(175.5
(175.8
(175.0
79.'* (175.0
N.D.^
79.6 (175.5
79.7 (175.8
79.7 (175.8
79.9
79.8
79.2
79.6
79.6
79.7
79.1*
80
80
(177.0
(176.5
81.0 (178.5
N.D.
80.3 (177.0
79.7 (175.8
79.7 (175.8
Start controlled diet.
Tt.D. = not done.
1-67
DOY
Date,
1973
TABLE A-3,- Continued
(a) Concluded
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
In-flight
11*5
lU6
Ihl
1U8
11*9
150
151
152
153
15i*
155
156
157
158
159
l6o
i6l
162
163
16I4
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
May 25
May 26
May 27
May 28
May 29
May 30
May 31
June 1
June
June
June
June
June
June
June 8
June 9
June 10
June 11
June 12
June 13
June l**
June 15
June 16
June 17
June 18
June 19
June 20
June 21
June 22
1
2
3
h
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Ik
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2h
25
26
27
28
R +
61.
61
61.2
62.1
61.1
61.7
61.6
61.2
61.6
60.5
60.1
60.7
61.0
61. i*
61.1
61.2
61.3
60.7
61.3
9 (
N.
N
N.
h
61.
61,
1
3
N
60.6
60.1*
60.5
60.8
136.5)
D.
D.
D.
(135. M
(135.0)
(136.8)
(13U.8)
(136.0)
(135.8)
(I3l*.9)
(135.8)
(133.1*)
(132. U)
(133.7)
iUk.k)
(135.3)
(131*. 7)
(131*. 9)
(135.2)
(133.9)
(135.2)
(131*. 7)
(135.1)
• D.
(133.6)
(133.1)
(133.3)
(I3l*.0)
77.2
N
N
N
75.6
75.2
76.1
75.3
75.5
75.9
75.9
75.3
71*. 7
75.3
71*. 9
76.0
76.0
75.7
75.9
75.1*
76.1
75.7
75.6
75.7
N
75.0
75.0
71*. 9
71*. 5
170.3)
D.
D.
D.
166.6)
165.9)
167.7)
166.1)
166. U)
167.2)
167.3)
166.0)
i6l*.6)
166.1)
165.1)
167.5)
167.6)
166.9)
167.1*)
166.2)
167.7)
167.0)
166.6)
166.9)
D.
165.3)
165.1*)
165.2)
161*. 2)
79.7 (
79.1*
79.2
78.9
79.0
78.6
78.0
78.8
79.1
79.1
78.5
78.1
78.6
78.1*
78.0
73.6
78.2
77.9
78.3
77.3
77.7
77.3
77.1*
77.2
76.5
175.8)
.D.
.D.
.D.
(175.1)
(171*. 6)
(173.9)
(171*. 2)
(173.2)
(172.0)
(173.8)
(171*. 5)
(171*.!*)
(173.0)
(172.2)
(173.1*)
(172.9)
(172.0)
(173.2)
(172.1*)
(171.8)
(172.6)
(170.5)
(171.2)
.D.
(170.3)
(170.6)
(170.3)
(168.7)
173
171*
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
18I*
185
186
187
188
June 22
June 23
June 2l*
June 25
June 26
June 27
June 28
June 29
June 30
July 1
July
July
July
July
July
July 7
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Ih
15
61.2
61.9
61.7
189 July
R + 16
Postflight
60.2 (132.8)
60.6 (133.5)
60.7 (133.8)
61.0 (131*. 5)
(135.0)
(136.5)
(136.0)
61.9 (136.5)
61.7 (136.0)
N.D.
61.5 (135.5)
60.8 (131*. 0)
60.8 (131*. 0)
60.8 (131*. 0)
61.0 (131*. 5)
N.D.
N.D.
71*. 3 (163.8)
73.8 (162.8)
75.1 (163.5)
N.D.
71*. 6 (1611.5)
71*. 8 (165.0)
75.1 (165.5)
N.D.
75.1 (165.5)
■N.D.
71*. 8 (165.0)
75.2 (165.8)
N.D.
75.0 (165.3)
71*. 8 (165.0)
N.D.
N.D.
76.0
76.14
78.1
77.1
77.3
77.1
77.0
77.5
77.5
r
77.7
77.0
77.8
77.2
77.5
77.5
(167.5)
(163.5)
(172.3)
(170.0)
(170.5)
(170.0)
(171.0)
(170.3)
(170.8)
.D.
(171. i)
(171.0)
(171.5)
(170.3)
(170.3)
(170.3)
77.6 (171.0)
"First shipboard weights.
Stop controlled diet.
1-68
DOY
Date,
1973
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(b) SL-3
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT PLT
Prefllght
^188
July 7
F
- 21
69
.3
(152.8)
62.9
(138.8)
89
.0
(196.3)
189
July 8
F
- 20
68
i*
(150.8)
62.5
(137.8)
86
7
(191.3)
190
July 9
F
- 19
68
2
(150.3)
61.7
(136.0)
88
.1
(19"*. 3)
191
July 10
F
- 18
68
8
(151.8)
62.1
(137.0)
87
.9
(193.8)
192
July 11
F
- 17
68
5
(151.0)
61.7
(136.0)
87
7
(193.3)
193
July 12
F
- 16
68
(150.0)
61.5
(135.5)
87
1
(192.0)
19'*
July 13
F
- 15
68
6
(151.3)
62.1
(137.0)
87
7
(193.3)
195
July lU
F
- ll*
68
9
(152.0)
61.6
(135.8)
88
5
(195.0)
196
July 15
F
- 13
68
6
(151.3)
61.7
(136.0)
88
6
(195.3)
197
July 16
F
- 12
68
3
(150.6)
61.5
(135.5)
88
1
(191*. 3)
198
July 17
F
- 11
68
5
(151.0)
62. U
(137.5)
87
8
(193.5)
199
July 18
F
- 10
68
7
(151.5)
62.0
(136.8)
87
8
(193.5)
200
July 19
F
- 9
68
9
(152.0)
62.1
(137.0)
88
2
(191*. 5)
201
July 20
F
- 8
68
6
(151.3)
61.6
(135.8)
88
3
(191*. 8)
202
July 21
F
- 7
68
6
(151.3)
61.3
(135.3)
88
1
(191*. 3)
203
July 22
F
- 6
68
(150.0)
61.7
(136.0)
87
I4
(192.8)
201*
July 23
F
- 5
68.
5
(151.0)
61.9
(136.5)
87
7
(193.3)
205
July 2lt
F
- h
68.
8
(151.8)
62.5
(137.8)
88
5
(195.0)
206
July 25
F
- 3
69
1
(152.3)
62.3
(137.3)
89
(196.3)
207
July 26-
F
- 2
68.
6
(151.3)
61.1
(131*. 8)
88.
8
(195.8)
208
July 27
F
- 1
68.
6
(151.3)
61.2
(135.0)
88
(19'.. 5)
209
July 28
1
68.
J
(151.0)
61.8
(136.3)
83.
3
(19'.. 8)
Ir
-flight
209
July 28
1
68.5
(151.0)
61.3
(136.3)
88.3
(19'.. 8)
210
July 29
2
67.1
(11*7.8)
60.5
(133.5)
'^86.5
(190.6)
211
July 30
3
66.9
(1I47.5)
59.5
(1^.2)
%U.2
(185.5)
212
July 31
14
66.3
(1U6.I)
59.1*
(130.9)
''85.6
(188.6)
213
Aug. 1
5
66. I4
(1U6.3)
59.1.
(131.0)
85.3
(133.0)
21 U
Aug. 2
6
65.9
(11*5. M
59.5
(1U.2)
85.7
(189.0)
215
Aug. 3
7
65.7
(1U1..3)
59.5
(131.2)
85.3
(138.1)
216
Aug, I4
8
65.9
(ll»5.3)
59.1.
(131.0)
85.8
(139.1)
217
Aug. 5
9
66.1
(1I45.6)
59.3
(130.8)
86.0
(l'i9.7)
218
Aug. 6
10
66.3
(1I.6.2)
59.3
(130.7)
85.3
(189. J)
219
Aug. 7
11
66.0
(1I.5.6)
58.7
(129.!.)
35.8
(139.1)
220
Aug. 8
12
65.7
(lUU.8)
59.1
(liO.3)
8S.8
(189.3)
221
Aug. 9
13
66.1
(11.5.6)
59 . 1.
(130.9)
86.1
(189.9)
222
Aug. 10
1I4
66. 'j
(11*6.6)
59.1.
(130.9)
85.6
(L»».3)
223
Aug. 11
15
66.3
(11.6.2)
59.0
(130.1)
86.0
(1M9.7)
221*
Aug. 12
16
66.1
(ll'5.8)
59.2
(iiO.I.)
85.3
(ilig.i)
225
Aug. 13
17
66.0
(11.5.5)
59.1
(150.2)
8 '-..8
(189. i)
226
Aug. llj
18
65.8
(1I.5.I)
58 . 7
(129. i.)
85.8
(1.39.1)
227
Aug. 15
19
66.1
(1I.5.7)
59.2
(1W.6)
36.0
(i;w.5)
228
Aug. 16
20
66.2
(1I.6.0)
59.1
(150. ■.)
M5.1.
(183.1)
229
Aug. 17
21
66. I4
(11*6.1.)
58 . 9
(129.9)
85.6
(ic;h.8)
230
Aug. 18
22
66. li
(1I.6.3)
58.6
(129.;)
86.1
(i;'.9.8)
231
Aug. 19
23
66.5
(11*6.6)
58.7
(129.0
35.8
(1.39.1 )
232
Aug. 20
2I4
65.9
(11.5.3)
59.1
(liO.I.)
80.3
1190.,')
233
Aug. 21
25
66.
3
(1I16.2)
59.1
(H0.2)
85.
6
(18^3)
Start controlled diet.
'BMMD readings very scatter'-d; meciLjuremeritr; uiir'd iabli;.
1-69
DOY
Date,
19T3
MD
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(b) Continued
Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
In-flight
231*
235
236
237
238
239
21*0
2l*l
21*2
21*3
21*1.
21*5
21*6
21*7
21*8
21*9
250
251
252
253
251*
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
261*
265
266
267
268
Aug. 22
Aug. 23
21*
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
1
2
3
1*
5
6
7
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept.
Sept,
Sept.
Sept,
Sept.
Sept. 8
Sept. 9
Sept. 10
Sept. 11
Sept. 12
Sept. 13
Sept. ll*
Sept. 15
Sept. 16
Sept, 17
Sept. 18
Sept. 19
Sept. 20
Sept. 21
Sept. 22
Sept. 23
Sept. 21*
Sept. 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
31*
35
36
37
38
39
1*0
1*1
1*2
1*3
1*1*
1*5
1*6
1*7
1*8
1*9
50
51
52
53
51.
55
56
57
58
59
R +
66.5
(11*6.5
) 58.8
(129.6)
66.1
(11*5.7
) 58.6
129.3)
66.1
(11*5.7
59.2
(130.5)
65.8
(11*5.1
58.7
129.5)
66.0
(11*5.6
58.6
129.2)
66.1*
(11*6.1*
58.9
129.9)
66.5
(11*6.7
58.8
129.7)
66.3
(11*6.1
58.9
129.9)
66.6
(11.6.8
58.6
129.3)
66.1*
(11*6.3
58.6
129.1)
66.1*
11*6.3
58.7
129.1*)
66.3
(il*6.l
58.7
129.3)
66.6
11*6.8
58.8
129.5)
66.3
11*6.1
58.5
128,9)
66.1*
11*6.1*
59.0
130.0)
66.2
11*5.8
58.3
128.5)
66.1*
11*6.5
58.3
128.5)
66.5
11*6.7
58.7
129.1*)
66.6
a 1*6. 8
58.9
129.8)
66.7
11*7.1
58.1
128.0)
66.0
11*5.1*
58.2
128.2)
66.3
11.6.1
58.6
129.1)
65.5
11.1..5
58.1*
128.6)
65.8
11*5.1
58.3
128.5)
66.0
11*5.5
58.3
128.6)
66.2
11*6.0
58.3
128,6)
65.9
11*5.1.
58.5
129,0)
65.8
11.5.1
58.2
128,2)
66.0
11.5.6
58.5
129.0)
66.2
11.5.8
58.5
128.9)
65.8
11*5.0
59.0
130.0)
65.1*
11*1*. 3
58.6 (
129.1)
65.3
11*3.9)
58.0
127,9)
65.0
11*3.1*
58.2 {
128,3)
61*. 6
11*2.1*)
58.2 (
128.1*)
85.7
85.5
85
85
85
85
85
85.7
85.9
85.7
85.7
85.3
85.3
85.6
85.1*
85.6
85.9
85.3
85.6
85.7
86.1
85.7
85.7
85.1*
85.6
85.3
8=). 7
85.3
85.7
85.5
85.2
85.3
85.1
81*. 7
8U.1
188,8
188,6
188,1
188,6
187.8
188.8
189.3
189.0
189.1*
188,8
189.0
188.1
188.1
188.7
188.2
188,7
189,3
188,1
188.7)
189.0)
189.9)
188.8)
188. £
188.3)
188,8)
188,1)
188,8)
188,1)
189,0)
188,5)
187.7)
188.0)
187.7)
186,6)
185.5)
1-70
Measurement made after breakfast; mass of breakfast deducted.
a-^
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(b) Conclude
■d
DOY
Date
' >
MD
Weight, kg (lb)
1973
CDR
SPT
PLT
Postflight
268
Sept.
25
<^R
+
61*. 6 (11*2.5)
58.7 (129.5)
81*.
.1 (185.5)
269
Sept.
26
R
+
1
61*. 2 (lUl.5)
58.3 (128.5)
8U
.1 (185.5)
270
Sept.
27
R
+
2
61*. 5 (11*2.3)
58.9 (129.8)
81*
.6 (186.5)
271
Sept.
28
R
+
3
^ N.D.
66.8 (11*7.3)
60.2 (132.8)
N.D.
272
Sept.
29
R
+
1*
60.0 (132.3)
87,
,1 (192.0)
273
Sept.
30
R
+
5
66.5 (11*6.5)
^60.2 (132.3)
87
.0 (191.8)
271*
Oct.
1
R
+
6
66.7 (11*7.0)
60.0 (132.3)
87.
.1 (192.0)
275
Oct.
2
R
+
7
67.0 (11*7.8)
60.1 (132.5)
87.
,2 (192.3)
276
Oct.
3
R
+
8
66.8 (11*7.3)
60.1* (133.3)
86.
,2 (190.0)
277
Oct.
1*
R
+
9
66.8 (11*7.3)
60.3 (133.0)
86.
.7 (191.3)
278
Oct.
5
R
+
10
66.9 (11*7.5)
60.6 (133.5)
87.
.8 (193.5)
279
Oct.
6
R
+
11
67.1 (11*8.0)
61.0 (131*. 5)
87.
.8 (193.5)
280
Oct.
7
R
+
12
67.0 (11*7.8)
60.7 (133.8)
87.
.5 (193.0)
281
Oct.
8
R
+
13
67.1 (11*8.0)
61.1 (131*. 8)
87.
.7 (193.3)
282
Oct.
9
R
+
11*
67.1 (11*8.0)
61.1 (131*. 8)
87.
,8 (193.5)
283
Oct.
10
R
+
15
67.1* (11*8.5)
61.0 (131*. 5)
88.
.1 (I9l*.3)
281*
Oct.
11
R
+
16
67.6 (11*9.0)
61.1 (131*. 8)
88.
J (195.5)
285
Oct.
12
R
+
17
67.5 (11*8.8)
60.8 (131*. 0)
88,
.2 (191*. 5)
^^286
Oct.
13
R
+
18
N.D.
61.0 (131*. 5)
N.D.
287
Oct.
11*
R
+
19
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
288
Oct.
15
R
+
20
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
289
Oct.
16
R
+
21
68.9 (152.0)
N.D.
N.D.
290
Oct.
17
R
+
22
68.7 (151.5)
62.0 (136.8)
N.D.
291
Oct.
18
R
+
23
68,5 (151.0)
61.6 (135.8)
N.D.
292
Oct.
19
R
+
21*
68.5 (151.0)
61.0 (131*. 5)
N.D.
293
Oct.
20
R
+
25
68.1* (150.8)
60.9 (131*. 3)
N.D.
291*
Oct.
21
R
+
26
68.9 (152.0)
61.2 (135.0)
N.D.
295
Oct.
22
R
+
27
68.9 (152.0)
61.8 (136.3)
N.D.
296
Oct.
23
R
+
28
69.2 (152.5)
61.3 (135.3)
N.D.
297
Oct.
21.
R
+
29
69.1* (153.0)
61.8 (136.3)
88.
(191*. 0)
298
Oct.
25
R
+
30
69.3 (152.8)
N.D.
N.D.
299
Oct.
26
R
+
31
69.6 (152.5)
61.0 (131*. 5)
N.D.
300
Oct.
27
R
+
32
N.D.
61.6 (135.8)
N.D.
301
Oct.
28
R
+
33
N.D.
61.8 (136.3)
N.D.
302
Oct.
29
R
+
31*
N.D.
61.9 (136.5)
N.D.
First shipboard weights.
Stop controlled diet.
f
Measurement made after breakfast; mans of breakfast deducted.
1-71
DOY
Date
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(c) SL-lt
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
281
282
283
281*
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
^293
29l»
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
30U
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
311*
315
316
317
318
319
320
Oct. 8
Oct. 9
Oct. 10
Oct. 11
Oct. 12
Oct. 13
Oct. Ik
Oct. 15
Oct. 16
Oct. 17
Oct. 18
Oct. 19
Oct. 20
Oct. 21
Oct. 22
Oct. 23
Oct. 2k
Oct. 25
Oct. 26
Oct. 27
Oct. 28
Oct. 29
Oct. 30
Oct. 31
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Nov. 8
Nov. 9
Nov. 10
Nov. 11
Nov. 12
Nov. 13
Nov. Ik
Nov. 15
Nov. 16
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
1973
F - 39
F - 38
F - 37
F - 36
F - 35
F - 31*
F - 33
F - 32
F - 31
F - 30
F - 29
F - 28
F - 27
F - 26
F - 25
F - 2U
F - 23
F - 22
F - 21
F - 20
F - 19
F - 18
F - 17
F - 16
F - 15
F - Ik
F - 13
F - 12
F - 11
F - 10
F - 9
F - 8
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
F -
Preflight
N.D.
».D.
N.D.
N.D.
67.8
11*9.5)
66.7
11*7.0)
66.5
11*6.5)
66.2
11*6.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.2
11*8.3)
66.6
11*6.8)
66.3
1U6.3)
67.lt
11*8.5)
67.1
11*8.0)
67.2
11*8.3)
67.1
11*8.0)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.2
11*8.3)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.6
11*9.0)
68.0
150.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.5
11*8,8)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.2
11*8.3)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.9
11*9.8)
67.7
11*9.3)
68.2
150.3)
68.0
150.0)
68.0
150.0)
68.2
150.3)
67.7
11*9.3)
68.2
150.3)
68.0
150.0)
68.5
151.0)
68.0
150.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
68.0
150.0)
67.9
11*9.8)
70.5
155.5)
70.3
155.0)
71.1*
157.5)
71.2
157.0)
71.1
156.8)
71.3
157.1)
71.8
158.3)
72.3
159.5)
71.9
158.5)
71.0
156.6)
71.3
157.3)
71.0
156.3)
71.8
158.3)
72.0
158.8)
72,5
159.8)
71.1*
157.5)
71.7
158.0)
72.0
158.8)
71.1*
157.5)
71.2
157.0)
71.1*
157.5)
71.1
156.8)
71.3
157.3)
71.3
157.3)
71.6
157.8)
71.0
156.5)
71.2
157.0)
71.1*
157.5)
71.1*
157.5)
71.7
158.0)
71,7
158.0)
72.2
159.3)
71.7
158.0)
71.6
157.8)
71.0
156.5)
71.2
157.0)
71.3
157.3)
71.7
158.0)
71.2
157.0)
71.2
157.0)
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
N.D.
67.2
1U8.3)
67.1*
11*8.5)
67.5
11*8.8)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
68.0
150.0)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.9
1U9.8)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.6
1U9.O)
67.8
1U9.5)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.1*
11*8.5)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.2
11*8.3)
67.1*
11.8.5)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.1*
11*8.5)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.8
11*9.5)
68.0
150.0)
67.9
11*9.8)
67.5
1U8.8)
67.1
11*8.0)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.0
11*7.8)
67.6
11*9.0)
Start controlled diet.
1-72
DOY
Date
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(c) Continued
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
In-flight
321
Nov.
17,
1973
322
Nov,
18,
1973
323
Nov,
19,
1973
321;
Nov.
20,
1973
325
Nov,
21,
1973
326
Nov,
22,
1973
327
Nov.
23,
1973
328
Nov,
21*,
1973
329
Nov,
25.
1973
330
Nov,
26,
1973
331
Nov,
27,
1973
332
Nov.
28,
1973
333
Nov,
29.
1973
331*
Nov,
30,
1973
335
Dec,
1,
1973
336
Dec.
2.
1973
337
Dec,
3.
1973
338
Dec,
^,
1973
339
Dec,
5,
1973
3I4O
Dec,
6,
1973
3U1
Dec,
T,
1973
31*2
Dec,
8.
1973
31*3
Dec,
9,
1973
3Ul4
Dec,
10,
1973
3U5
Dec,
11,
1973
3lt6
Dec.
12,
1973
3I47
Dec,
13,
1973
31*8
Dec,
11*.
1973
3U9
Dec,
15,
1973
350
Dec,
16,
1973
351
■Dec,
17,
1973
352
Dec,
18,
1973
353
Dec,
19,
1973
351*
Dec,
20.
1973
355
Dec,
21,
1973
356
Dec,
22,
1973
357
Dec,
23.
1973
358
Dec,
2I4,
1973
359
Dec,
25,
1973
360
Dec,
26,
1973
361
Dec.
27,
1973
362
Dec.
28,
1973
363
Dec.
29.
1973
36I4
Dec.
30,
1973
365
Dec.
31,
1973
2
3
1*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
lU
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21*
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
31*
35
36
37
38
39
1*0
1*1
1*2
1*3
1*1*
1*5
U6
N
.D.
66.7
(11*7.1)
67.0
(11*7.8)
67.1
(11*7.9)
67.1
(11*7.9)
67.1
(11*7.9)
67.3
(11*8,3)
66,9
(11*7.5)
67.1
(11*7.9)
67.2
al*8.1)
66.8
11*7.3)
67.3
11*8,1*)
66,9
11*7.5)
67.1*
11*8.6)
67.2
11*8.1)
67.2
11*8,2)
67.0
11*7.7)
67.3
11*8.1*)
67.3
11*8,1*)
67.3
11*8,1*)
67.1*
11*8,7)
67.1*
11*8,7)
67.7
11*9.2)
67.6
11*9.1)
67.9
ll*9.7)
67.5
11*8.8)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.5
11*8.9)
67.1*
11*8.6)
67.7
11*9.2)
67,5
11*8.8)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.1*
11*8.7)
67,8 (
11*9.1*)
67.7
11*9.1*)
67.7 (
11*9.1*)
67,5 (
1U8.6)
67.1 (
11*8.0)
67.0 (
11*7.8)
67.6 (
11*9.1)
67.7 {
11*9.1*)
67.9 (
11*9.6)
67.8 (
11*9.1*)
67.9 (
11*9.6)
67.7 (
ll*9.2)
N
.D.
70.8
(156.0)
70.5
(155.1*)
70.5
(155.5)
70.1*
(155.3)
70.2
(151*. 7)
70.1
(151*. 6)
69.8
(153.8)
69.5
(153.3)
69.0
(152.0)
69.3
(152.7)
69.1*
(153.0)
69.6
(153.5)
69.7
153.6)
69.9
151*. 1)
69.6
153.1*)
69.5
153.3)
69.0
152.2)
69.1*
153.0)
69.1
152.3)
69.1
152.3)
68.9
151.9)
69.0
152,2)
68.7
151.5)
69.8
153.8)
69.0
152.2)
69.1
152. U)
69.3
152.7)
69.1
152.3)
69.1
152.1*)
69.1
152.1*)
69.1
152.1*)
68.8 (
151.6)
69.0 (
152.0)
68.6 (
151.3)
68.8 (
151.7)
68.9 (
151.9)
69.2 (
152.5)
68,6 (
151.3)
68.6 (
151.2)
69.1* (
153.0)
69.1 (
152.1*)
68.7 (
151.5)
68.9 (
151.9)
68.6 (
151.3)
N
65.7
65.9
65.1*
65.5
65.3
65.8
61*. 9
65.6
65.1
65.2
65.6
65.3
65.6
65.7
65.9
65.8
66.0
65.7
65.6
65.9
65.8
65.6
65.6
65.9
65.8
65.9
65.1*
65.7
65.5
65.5
65.7
66.0
66.0
66.1
66.2
65.8
65.9
66.0
65.9
66.0
66.2
65.7
65.9
66.1
.D.
lUU,
11*5.
11*1*.
11*1*. 1*
11*1*.
11*5.
11*3.0
11*1*. 6
11*3.6
11*3.7
11*14. 6
ll*i*.o
11*1*. 6
11*1*. 8
11*5.1*
11*5.0
11*5.6
11*1*. 8
11*4.7
11*5.3
11*5.0
11*1*. 6
II4I4.6
11*5,3
11*5.0
11*5.2
11*1*. 2
11*14.8'
11*1*. 5
11*1*. 3
II.I4.8
11*5. V
11*5.6
11*5.7
11(6.0
1U5.O
11*5.1*
11*5.6
11*5.3
11*5.1*
11*6.0
11*1*. 9
11*5.3
1I.5.8
1-73
DOY
Date
TABLE A-3.- Continued
(c) Continued
MD Weight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
In-flight
1
2
3
1*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
11*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21*
25
26
27
26
29
30
31
32
33
31*
35
36
37
38
39
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Jan. 8
Jan. 9
Jan. 10
Jan. 11
Jan. 12
Jan. 13
Jan. ll*
Jan. 15
Jan. l6
Jan. 17
Jan. 18
Jan. 19
Jan. 20
Jan. 21
Jan. 22
Jan. 23
Jan. 2lt
Jan. 25
Jan. 26
Jan. 27
Jan. 28
Jan. 29
Jan. 30
Jan. 31
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
I97I*
I97I*
1971*
197I*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
I97I*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
I97I*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197 1*
197I*
1971*
I97I*
I97I*
1971*
I97I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1*7
1*8
1*9
50
51
52
53
51*
55
56
57
58
59
Go
61
62
63
61*
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
71*
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
81*
+
67.3
[11*8.1*)
67.0
11*7.6)
67.9
11*9.8)
67.5
11*8.9)
67.5
11*8.9)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.lt
11*8.6)
67.7
11*9.2)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.3
11*8.3)
67.1*
11*8.6)
68.0
11*9.8)
67.8
11*9.1*)
67.6
ll*9.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.8
1I.9.I*)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.7
11*9.1*)
67.9
1I.9.6)
67.6
11*9.0)
67.8
11*9.5)
67.7
11*9.2)
68.3 (
150.6)
68.1
150.1)
67.6
11*9.1)
67.7
11*9.3)
67.7
11*9.2)
67.3
ll*8.1*)
67.1*
11*8.6)
67.1* (
11*8.7)
67.9
11*9.8)
68.1
150.1)
67.6 (
11*9.1)
67.5
11*8.9)
67.5
ll*8.8)
67.1* (
11*8.6)
67.1
ll*7.9)
67.9 (
11*9.7)
68.9
(151.8)
68.6
(151.3)
68.8
(151.7)
69.1*
(153.0)
68.6
(151.2)
66.6
(151.3)
69.0
152.2)
69.6
153.5)
68.6
151.3)
68.0
150.0)
69.3
152.7)
69.7
153.6)
69.0
152.2)
68.8
151.6)
66.8
151.7)
69.1
152.3)
69.2
152.6)
69.2
152.6)
69.6
153.1*)
69.6
153.lt)
69.0
152.2)
69.5
153.1)
69.0
152.2)
68.9
151.8)
69.3
152.9)
68.9
152.0)
70.0
151*. 1*)
69.9
151*. 2)
70.0
151*. It)
69.7
153.6)
69.3
152.8)
69.8
153.9)
69.9
15lt.l)
69.7
153.7)
69.6
153.8)
69.9
151*. 0)
69.3
152.7)
69.3
152.8)
69.8 (
153.8)
65.7
(11*1*. 9)
65.1*
(ll*U,2)
65.1*
(11*1*. 2)
65.6
(11*1*. 6)
65.2
(11*3.7)
65.1
(11*3.5)
65.6
11*1*. 5)
65.8
(11*5.0)
66.0
11*5.1*)
65.1*
11*1*. 2)
65.9
11*5.1*)
66.0
11.5.6)
65.8
11*5.2)
66.1
11*5.8)
66.2
11*6.0)
66.1*
11*6.5)
66.3
11*6.1)
65.8
11.5.2)
65.7
ll.U.8)
66.0
11*5.6)
66.1
11*5.8)
65.9
11*5.3)
65.7
ll*li.8)
66.6
11*6.9)
66.3
11*6.1)
66.3
11*6.1)
66.2
11*5.8)
66.0
11*5.5)
66.1
11*5.8)
66.5
11*6.7)
66.2
11*5.9)
66.7
11*7.1)
66.2
11*5.9)
66. U
11*6.1.)
66.6
11*6.9)
66.6
1I.6.9)
66. I4
11*6.1.)
66.6
1U6.9)
66.2
l''5.9)
1-74
DOY
39
uo
Ul
1.2
i»3
1*1.
U6
1*7
1*8
1*9
50
51
52
53
51*
55
56
57
59
60
6l
62
63
61*
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
71*
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
81*
85
Date
TABLE A-3.- Concluded
(c) Concluded
MD Ueight, kg (lb)
CDR SPT
PLT
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Feb.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
Mar.
9
10
11
12
13
11*
15
i6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21*
25
26
27
28
1
2
3
li
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13.
ll*
15
16
17
18,
19
20
21
22
23
21*
25
26
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
1971*
197I*
1971*
1971*
1
2
3
1*
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
ll*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
21*
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
31*
35
36
37
38
39
1*0
1*1
1*2
1*3
hh
1*5
1*6
Postflight
67.8
(1I.9.5)
67.1
(1148,0)
67.9
(11*9.8)
67.6
(ll*9.0)
67.9
(11*9.8)
68.5
(151.0)
68, U
(150.8)
68. I4
(150.8)
N
.D.
68.1*
(150.8)
68.3
(150.5)
68.8
(151.8)
68.6
(151.3)
68.6
(151.3)
68.7
(151.5)
68.8
(151.8)
68.5
151.0)
68.6
151.3)
68. U
150.8)
67.9
11*9.8)
68,9
152.0)
69.6
153.5)
69.6
153.5)
68.5
151.0)
68.8
151.8)
68.6
151.3)
68.9
152.0)
69.1*
153.0)
69.2
152.5)
68.9
152.0)
69.2 (
152.5)
69.2
152.5)
68.9
152.0)
68.6 (
151.3)
69.3 (
152,8)
68.8 (
151.8)
68.5 (
151.0)
68,7 (
151.5)
70.2 (
151*. 8)
70.0 (
151*. 3)
69.3 (
152.8)
69.2 (
152.5)
68.5 (
151.0)
68.5 (
151.0)
69.5 (
153.3)
70.1* (
155.3)
69.2 (
152.5)
68.6
(151.3)
69.1*
(153.0)
70.1
(151*. 5)
71.0
(156.5)
70.8
(156.0)
71.1
(156,8)
71.7
(158, Q)
71,6
(157,8)
71.0
(156,5)
71.1
(156,8)
71.8
(158,3)
71.7
(158,0)
71.6
(157,8)
71.8
(158,3)
71.1*
(157.5)
71.3
(157.3)
71.2
(157,0)
71.7
(158,0)
71.1*
(157.5)
71.2
(157.0)
72.5
(159.8)
71.1*
(157,5)
72.2
(159,3)
72.7
(160,3)
73.7
(162,5)
72.8
(160,5)
72.8
(160.5)
72.1
(159.0)
N
.D,
N
.D.
73.7
(162,5)
71*. 2
(163.5)
73.0
(161.0)
73.8
(162.8)
71*. 2
(163.5)
73.8
(162.8)
73.0
(161.0)
71*. 2
(163.5)
73.9
(163.0)
D.
D.
D.
D,
D,
D.
D,
D,
66.1
(11*5.8)
66.8
(11*7.3)
67.0
(11*7.8)
67.6
(11*9.0)
67.1*
(11*8.5)
67,0
(11*7,8)
67,1*
(11*8,5)
67,9
(11*9.8)
67.7
(11*9.3)
67.9
(11*9.8)
67.0
(11*7.8)
67.5
(11*8,8)
67.6
(11*9.0)
67.5
(11*8.8)
67.6
(11*9.0)
67,5
(ll*8,8)
67,6
(ll*9.0)
67.7
(11*9.3)
67.2
(11*8.3)
68.0
(150,0)
69.3
(152.8)
69.3
(152.8)
69.1*
(153.0)
70.1
(151*. 5)
69.1*
(153.0)
69.6
(153.5)
69.9
(151*. 0)
69.9
(151*. 0)
69.6
(153.5)
70.3
(155.0)
69.9
(151*. 0)
69.1*
(153.0)
69.6
(153.5)
69.7
(153,8)
70,3
(155.0)
69.9
(151*. 0)
70,9
(156.3)
71.1*
(157.5)
70,6
(155.8)
69.9
(151*. 0)
N
.D.
N
.D.
70. 1*
(155.3)
70.3
(155.0)
'First shipboard weights.
Stop controlled diet.
1-75
APPENDIX B
HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS OF SKYLAB 4 CREWMEN
Height and change- in-height (A height) measurements of the Skylab 4
(SL-4) crewmen are contained in tables B-1 to B-3. The crewman designations
are commander (CDR), science pilot (SPT), and pilot (PLT). Pref light meas-
urements were taken with the crewmen in an erect standing position, and
postflight measurements were taken with the crewmen in both erect and supine
positions. In-flight measurements were taken in the morning and afternoon on
mission day (MD) 21, MD-35, MD-57, MD-60, and MD-82. Recovery day is
designated R + 0, R + 1 is 1 day after recovery, and so forth.
1-76
■\
TABLE B-1.- HEIGHT AND CHANGE-IN-HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS
OF SL-4 CDR
(a) Preflight measurements
Date Erect height, cm (in.)
1966
172.2
(67.8)
1967
172.7
(68.0)
1968
172.5
(67.9)
1969
172.7
(68.0)
1970
172.7
(68.0)
1971
172.7
(68,0)
1972
173.0
(68.1)
^1972
''172.7
(68.0)
(b) In-flight measurements
Day Height and A height
Morning Afternoon
cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent
2.7 177.5 (68.9) 4.8 (1.9) 2.8
2.9 177.5 (69.9) 4.8 (1.9) 2.8
2.9 176.8 (69.6) 4.1 (1.6) 2.4
3.4 —
3.0
Suit fit; other preflight measurements were from annual
physical examinations.
Baseline.
MD-21
177.3 (69.8)
4.6 (1.8)
MD-35
177,8 (70.0)
5.1 (2.0)
MD-57
177.8 (70.0)
5.1 (2.0)
MD-82
178.6 (70.3)
5.9 (2.3)
Mean
5.2 (2.03)
1-77
TABLE B-1.- Concluded
(c) Postfllght measurements
Day Height and A height
Erect Supine
cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent
R +
"^01:42
--
~
—
176.8 (69.6)
4.1 (1.6)
2.4
■^03:03
174.8
(68.8)
2.1 (0.8)
1.2
—
~
~
"^05:43
174.0
(68.5)
1.3 (.5)
.7
~
—
~
R + 1
Morning
Afternoon
175.3
173.4
(69.0)
(68.3)
2.6 (1.0)
.7 (.25)
1.5
.4
174.8 (68.8)
2.1 (.8)
1.2
R + 4
175.3
(69.0)
2.6 (1,0)
1.5
~
~
—
R + 5
173.7
(68.4)
1.0 (.4)
.6
176.0 (69.3)
3.3 (1.3)
1.9
R + 17
172.7
(68.0)
(0)
174,8 (68.8)
2.1 (.8)
1.2
Time after recovery, hours:rainutes.
TABLE B-2,- HEIGHT AND CHANGE-IN-HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS
OF SL-4 SPT
(a) Preflight measurements
Date Erect height, cm (in.)
1970
172.7
(68.0)
^1972
^73.0
(68.1)
1973
172.7
(68.0)
^^1973
175.3
(69.0)
^Suit fit.
''Baseline.
, 1 ,* f t-_^(: e
"35 days before lift-off.
1-78
TABLE B-2.- Concluded
(b) In-flight measureraents
Day Height and ii height
Morning Afternoon
cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent
MD-21
177.8 (70.0)
A. 8 (1.9)
2.8
MD-35
178.6 (70.3)
5.6 (2.2)
3,2
MD-60
177.8 (70.0)
4,8 (1.9)
2,8
MD-82
179,8 (70.8)
6.8 (2.7)
4,0
Mean
5,5 (2.18)
3,2
177.8 (70.0) 4.8 (1.9) 2.8
178.8 (70.4) 5.8 (2.3) 3.4
178.0 (70.1) 5.0 (2.0) 3.0
(c) Postflight measurements
Day Height and A height
Erect Supine
cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent
R +
d
01:53 —
^03:08 176.5 (69,5)
^07:43 175.0 (68.9)
R + 1
Morning 175.3 (69.0)
Afternoon 174.0 (68.5)
R + 4 174.0 (68.5)
R + 5 174.8 (68.8)
R + 17 174.5 (68.7)
~
~
178.8 (70.4)
5.8 (2.3)
3.5 (1.4)
2.1
—
~
2.0 (.8)
1.2
—
—
2.3 (.9)
1.3
__
„
1.0 (.4)
1.0
176.0 (69.3)
3.0 (1.2)
1.0 (.4)
1.0
~
—
1.8 (.7)
1.0
176.5 (69.5)
3.5 (1.4)
1.5 (.6)
.9
176.5 (69.5)
3.5 (1.4)
3.4
l.f
2.1
2.1
Time after recovery, hours :minutes.
1-79
Day
TABLE B-3.- HEIGHT AND CHANGE-IN-HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS
OF SL-4 PLT
(a) Prefllght measurements
Date Erect height, cm (in.)
1966
173.0 (68.1)
1969
173.5 (68.3)
'1972
''173.2 (68.2)
1973
173.5 (68.3)
(b) In-flight measurements
Height and A height
Morning
Afternoon
cm (in.)
A cm
(A in.)
A percent
cm (in.)
A cm (A in.)
A percent
MD-21
178.8 (70.4)
5.6
(2.2)
3.2
179.1 (70.5)
5.6 (2.3)
3.4
MD-35
178.6 (70.3)
5.4
(2.1)
3.1
178.6 (70.3)
5.1 (2.1)
3.1
MD-57
177.8 (70.0)
4.6
(1.8)
2.6
176.8 (69.6)
3.3 (1.4)
2.1
MD-82
179.3 (70.6)
6.1
(2.4)
3.5
—
—
—
Mean
5.4
(2.13)
3.1
—
—
—
Suit fit.
Baseline.
"^15 days before lift-off.
1-80
TABLE B-3.- Concluded
(c) Postflight measurements
Day Height and A height
Erect Supine
cm (in.) 4 cm (A in.) A percent cm (in.) A cm (A in.) A percent
R +
'*01:26 _ — _ 177.5 (69.9) 5.9 (1.7) 2.5
"^03:53 175.0 (68.9) 1.8 (0.7) 1.0 _ _ __
R + 1
Morning 174.0 (68.5) .8 (.3) .4
Afternoon 173.5 (68.3) .3 (.1) .1 175.0 (68.9) 1.8 (.7) 1.0
R + 17 173.7 (68.4) .5 (.2) .3 175.3 (69.0) 5.8 (.8) 1.2
Time after recovery, hours :minutes.
1-81
APPENDIX C
TRUNCAL, NECK, AND LIMB GIRTH MEASUREMENTS OF U.S. SPACE-FLIGHT CREWMEN
Truncal, neck, and limb girth measurements of Skylab and Apollo crewmen
made before, during, and after various flights are presented in this appen-
dix. Table C-1 contains data on truncal, neck, and arm girth of the Skylab 3
(SL-3) commander (CDR), science pilot (SPT), and pilot (PLT) obtained before
flight, in flight (on mission day (MD) 38 and MD-54), and after flight (on
recovery day (R + O) and on the 1st, 2nd, and 4th days after recovery (days
R + 1, R + 2, and R + 4, respectively)). Change-in-girth values (A girth)
(with the preflight measurement as the baseline value) are also provided.
All measurements were made in the anatomical position.
In table C-2, truncal and neck girth measurements of SL-4 crewmen made
30 and 15 days before lift-off (days F - 30 and F - 15, respectively),
during flight, and after fligltt are compared to the preflight measurement
made 4 days before lift-off (day F - 4), the baseline value in each case.
Tables C-3 to C-5 contain detailed circumference measurements of the
left (L) and right (R) legs of SL-4 crewmen. Daily volumes for both the left
and the right leg of each crewman are given, together with preflight means
and standard deviations.
Table C-6 contains data on individual calf circumference and lower-limb
volume from preflight and postflight measurements of the CDR, the command
module pilot (CMP), and the lunar module pilot (LMP) of selected Apollo mis-
sions, in a resting, supine position. Preflight individual means and
standard deviations and preflight and postflight group means and standard
deviations are given, together with other statistical indicators.
The upper-limb volumes and changes in upper-limb volumes of Skylab
crewmen shown in table C-7 were computed from girth segments every 3 cm from
wrist to shoulder of both arms.
All truncal and neck girth measurements were made in the anatomical
position.
1-82
+
OS
+
Pi
+
Pi
o
+
Pi
CNvDON <3-v£)tT\ mmvO i— lOiH r-HOO
Ill
OQrH i-IOi-l l^iH>-l CSiHiH III 00
n T I fo c^ a\ m
ooOcN r^CT\o> (y\ '-t ^ m \a r^ r^ <t (j\ a 0'\ <t
c\"-Hro iHocM lOOo OOO ctncncsi a>Or-j
ojll rni ONll ONll r^ll en
coocsi oootN inunm oomro r^^foN i— lovo
CT\r-ln CJSiHOO ^OO OOO OSCMCM r^MCM
CMII (Nil a^ O^Tl r^ll rnil
cNvD<r csivDtsi cNioooo lOvooo r^-3-iH ^rrooo
OOtNCO CSiHu-1 lOOO <yii-li-l ooro-d- oooo
<Mll cNII o^lT 0011 r^ll rn
CO
M
u
u
m
I
en
o
a
u
~3-
00
I
00
04
O 00 00
0^
CM
I
00 CN 00
tN I I
o
CO
O 00 vD
O O CN
m I I
00 O "~i
OO fM O
CN I I
o
I I t
I I I
I I I
I I I
c:^
I I
I I
00 CN CN
00 I I
n 00 -H
vo "^ r~~
r^ I I
ro 00 T-H
vo LTi r-~
1^ I I
eg
CO
r-~ O CN
c^ I I
i-H O ^
r^ t— I CN
c^ I I
CO
en
Pi
H
I
m
<
c
B
(U
M
3
CO
«
<u
X
E
u
E
" o
CO
a. -
c
o
u
j= j=
•H M Vj
^ -H -H
14-1 < <
^
E
o
" E <u
to o a
a
^ t-i M
00 00 -u 00 oo
00 < <
p.
tn
c
•H
u
o
4-1
)-l
•H
to
c
c
0)
u
u
x: x:
-u 00 00
to
0) < <
u
s
o
U
o
4-1
u
1-1
1)
c
0)
o
)-l
a.
j= x;
4-1 U
u u
to
0)
u
00 00
< <
c
1)
u
0)
c
0)
E
o
•a
, 4-1 4-1
U U
< <
u
z
c
0)
a
M
x; jz
4-1 U
l-l l-l
•H -H
00 00
O <
1-83
+
m ~a- CTv
r~ iH -*
(Ti O O
00
00
CO
I I
I I
I I
I I
<yi o o
CM
+
Pi
+
o
+
Pi
I
onoooo mvoiH <yir-(cM o^^OlN cvjr^a\
... ... ... rii ... ...
t^ot^ o>ocN oOiHiH III Lnfo<r mo-H
CSIICN 0011 r>.||ro||
vOiHOO OnOO ovi— ICM rOtTv-* <siooo O^O00
... • ... ... ... ...
t^r^^O 00 OO^iH iHCMrO vDrorO -J-rHCN
cvjil CM 0011 0011 r^ll coir
or^ON mvOiH cMoocTi c^jocm trvco^a- vocn^o
r^-iHiTi cTiOcM CTiOO cni-(i-( -<f~j-in >3-.-iro
(Nil CM 0011 0011 r^ll coil
Or^-* CO<f>3- OOCMVD <f00a\ OCMtH onooo
OOOtNJ a^O'^ VOCOCO rOOO CNI~>-0> <ri— ICM
CMII CM 0011 0011 r^ll coil
■a
01
00
3
en
1-1
\o
o
VO
cn
lO
o
CM
CM
tH
iH
O
C
.
.
.
.
.
.
•
.
.
.
.
.
•H
g
vO
CM
CT\
r^
.-(
<r
1 1
1 -»
o
o
■-I
oo
o
j
4-1
CM
1
1
CM
1
1
1 1
1 00
1
1
r^
1
.-1
c
1
H
1
PL,
C/3
ij
.
/— \
x;
1
^
60
•H
as
o
•
CM
CM
as
u
.-1
00
00
(M
o
a\
00
0^
CO
w
(U
►J
)-l
m
PLi
<
H
u
C
(U
B
<u
u
3
CO
(U
S
B
V
B
- a
CO
O 4J
•H u
00
4-1
01
4J
c
<u
o
<u
a.
00
CO
o.
(!)*•*
o x: ^
•H 4J *J
•H 1-1
4J 00 00
oo< <
E
<J
c
OJ
o
u
d)
a
c x: jn
•H 4J 4J
u u
4J oo 00
CO
0) < <
x:
o
B
o
4J
c
0)
o
M
OJ
X x:
4.1 4-1
u u
4J 00 00
CO
0) < <
E
o
c
0)
o
u
0)
a.
C
0)
e
o
x; X
4J 4J
M U
•H T-l
00 00
< <
c
0)
CJ
u
(U
X X
4-1 4J
u u
00 00
< <
1-84
-a-
o
vO
00
ro
i-i
CM
O CM CM
+
•
•
•
•
•
•
• • •
oi
on
?
1
CO
iH
1
57?
tH
CM
+
O
CO
ON
VD
CN
v£>
r~^ un iri
m
o
o
<r
o
O
vD o o
Pi
en
1
1
fn
o 1 r
CO
r^
r~
ill •
•
•
III rH
O
H
-*
CM 00 <yi
a\ o o
00
0\ CO CM
.H iH ro
O ^ 00
a\
o <r vD
(U
•o
3
iH
O
C
o
u
H
CM
+
•
•
o
1
•
1
•
cn
•
«
?
•
O
« •
=P7
•
o
o
•
o
•
o
•
00
•
rH
•
1
•
o
•
o
+
-a-
CM
VO
<T
o
00
r-
m m
in
en
en
vO
CM
CM
V£>
o
m
CM
1
1
CM
m
CM
1
1
o
7?
en
1
en
1
00
00
o
O
<-{
CM
U1
o
vO
00
m
o\
vO
00
<r CM
vO
CM
CM
a\
m
rH
a\
en
r~~
en
m
?
rH
1
en
en
?
CM
1
o
I-I
CM CM
1 1
CJ\
en
1
en
1
en
00
~3-
1
I
o
-a-
o
O
00
en
1-^
•
cn
CT\
•
1
•
1
00
•
CM
m
•
1
•
1
1
1
1 1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
o
•
>a-
CO
•
1
O
•
1
o
•
•
o
o
•
r
u
<
x:
bO
^D
•H
•
rH
m
<4H
en
<U
u
Pm
en
O
00
o
o
00
00
o
-a-
c
e
<u
u
3
CO
«
<u
E
u
e
« o
to
CI. •>
0) J=
CJ u
•H M
ja -H
>4H <
(U
rJ
c
o
u
0)
e
a
u
c
<u
o
u
(U
CI,
•H JJ 4J
•H -H
4J 00 00
60 < <
•H
o
c
0)
o
(U
•H W .U
•> -H -H
4-1 OO 00
to
x:
4J
c
<u
o
)-i
<u
o.
01
J2
u
u
4-1 00 00
CO
(U < <
u
B
a
C
0)
o
V4
c
01
B
o
■a
£ x:
4-1 4-1
U U
< <
o
c
0)
o
u
B <u
u a.
j= x:
iJ 4J
u u
•H -H
oo 00
< <
1-85
CT\ sC r«.
(N o O
r^ lA u-i
<N O O
O (S tvj
OJ O O
^0 O --H
OO o <-'
-T CN fM
-J- CN 00
—( ^ <r
H <r u^
*C -3- -3-
O CO 00
M O v£i
00 m
s??
tN O O
o
s??
00 O -H
CN •J' lA
s??
en -3- i-H
(^ in o
O <^ -3-
.H u-i o CN
^ \0 v£
3??
ffv ■* i-H
r- O i-H
0^ r«. iH
CTv fS (*1
S??
<T ^O i£)
r^ O O
oo r- (TV
i£J Q ^
ro T I
00 «3- <■
O .-I .-4
■-H r^ CO
m m ri
t-t »o Ov r^
(SI O O
.-I t-i .-<
O I 1
O 00 <?>
^ CS) (SJ
r^ O O
m r^ \D
CO m (n
■H ^ ^
00 O I-*
O rj fM
r-- O O
ON'J-u-l CT^<T^CT^ (M-^r-. -fl-CTi^r ^(MiH
cnJqq r--oo ^oo ooorj ^o-3-<r
00 T T a^ o^ (^ ^
-HtNvO 'tf-a--^ m»H<N OlAO (NOOrg
rHrsicN r^-oo (7^ •-^ <-< CT^f-^-3■ r^<ru-i
CO I I Cv 00 I I (^ CT*
inooCT^ oooooo o\fOu-i I— l^c^ ma^(^
CNQO f*^00 (N(MCM OOO'H r^^iTl
00 T I O^ 0^ (*^ C^
<r_i_( \0'^*o r-*inm t^ir^iA csjoo(n
moo oo—t'-H opQ <Ti •-* <x r^ <t Kn
00 o^ CT* T T ro CT^
I/IOOCM OOO O^-J -J'CTir-t CMCOi-H
^.— )(N CO<Hi— I I— lOO 0\(— (lO \0 ^^ <T
CO I I 0^ 0^ C^ O^
Of^CO vC^OvC Lnc^o u-ior^ -^Of^
f-((N(N r^OO ■-IO'-* OOi— tC-l ^ -^ <T
CO I I CT> CT^ f^ ^
aou*^oo LHintn in^^H Oinf^ o-^"^
\D \0 r^ ir\ T-t f-t OOP coOiH OcviCNJ
r*t( ONll a^lT f^ (jNll
(Ni-to^ oOf-t lAr-im <f^n o<rr*
(Ti •^ <t u-ir-i(M oofsirsj r-OQ cy\(^(^
r-(| o^ll 0011 mil 0011
P-vOr^' CMOOOO OvOO^ rHsD\D rii-tn
r^ W^ \£) v^OO QOCNCN COO>— I 0>'^'^
I I
(T^ I I
00 I
m
00 I I
O U-t vO
n CT\ CO
in r^ <T
GO r^ CJN
m m »n
oo »n ^c
CT> (^ CM
(n 1 1
m (*> m
OS 1 1
^ O -*
(-1 1 1
00 ^ ^
00 1
r«- lO r^
CM Q O
00 T I
VT rH fn
*3 (N f^
O f^ <^
O r^ oo
-cr o o
m m sD
O^ tN (Nt
(nop
00 I T
r^ *0 O
en . .
<r in
r-i o o
<r \D vD
OO i-t 1— I
O f^ rs
OO CO Ov
fH u^ m
m 00 w
NO ^^^ (^
nH -3- <T
woo
CO O (M
I I I
X u u E u 4J
e . .
g 00 00 4-) 00 OO
1-86
o -T a^
CTi «N CN
^ O "-t r^ O f*^
,-( CN (N m r-t tM
(N .-( m
-T -^ -^
Ov iTi lA
vO -g- 1/^
lA e^ lA lA ^ U1
^D O O .-H ^ i-H
mil <T>
n (N (N
cr o o
CT\ 00 r-^
tM fM m
o ■* r^ f^ o o
O •* "^ »* rH O
<^J i-H •— ) m i-H n
1— < O f^
tf> CM PNJ
<r f^ lA
CM CM (N
lA a^ vO
CO (N f^
^?7
»A a^ O
'^ P T*
ir\ <T r^
rg fM (M
(-1 ^ ^ CD
in CTv O
CN Q -H
o\ T I
fn -T CO
in tH m
0\ (N ^-(
W CO ON
(M CO O
(N 0\ O*
to O O
00 sr m
>a- iH .H
u-i CM m
m r^ en
r». rsj CM
I
§
OO .-) rH .H (** vO
;?■?
r^ r»* 00
s ? ?
^ o m
0^ O O
O O^ fM
m fM (*i
•A U^ iTt
1-H CM (N
r-. r>. r^ i^ O «*
<M Q O 00 tN *n
o% T T fo
I I I
8
:8 S.
a
Bt B 8
n
•D < <1 « <] <]
5 5
4J 00 00
(A
0) < <
(5
- 00 00
O 00 00
4J <3 <
1-87
I I
I I I I I I I I I I M
I I I
I I
I I
so
I O
>
O
z
1— ^c^neN^— t ma^o^^o"^^^
I Csl eg
00 m fo m rH
O fH m in 00
(sj csl CM rg CM
O 00 fH r^ o in
Csl m en so -"a" CM
o a^ tn vo <N o
r^ r-i ^ r^ i-t 00
-^ r* o^ rH CO ■»*
-^ <T ^ tn in in
»n 0^ ^ <T CM <N
<J- ^C av iH -^j- sO
-;r ^ •»* m in m
■H so <T .H m
CM m O^ CM SO ON
in p>. NO 00 -^ CM
CT\ ON 0» ^ "^ ^
CO r^ ON iH en <r I
^a- <r ^ *n m m t
oononop^on NOOiHiHu-i<r mc^jinoNCMO .HiHOo^mvo
ON ON -^ m <T
O m 00 Oi CM -^
ON NO r*» r* ON 00
NO tH r^ O On O
m o» r-( CO r-t <r
^ -* in m tn m
o
>
rH r- 00 O NO
o m ON »H m m
o CM m r- ■** en
00 00 m ON o o
00 vO nO O O
CM CM O ON -^ "H
NO <r NO ^ o 00
so fo o m m NO
iH
00 nO CO nO o^
O nO r^ »H r^ NO
m NO ** m fH vT
r«» r*. -.T m ON en
fO NO ON iH m m I
<t -^ -J »A in in I
On <» rH ^ m
(O NO NO 00 CS CM
iH -^a- 1-t m fH ■*
CM in 00 ON m «H
CM O O 00 O
oo in ON 00 fO CM
o ** -<r m o oo
O O On ON O nO
in ON o iH <^ -J- I
-J- -^ m m m m i
m
o
« o
■J N
fH CM cn -^^ m vo
r^ 00 ON O tH CM
en -a- m NO 1^ 00
ON o fH CM en <T in
r-4 CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-88
<Ntf»^CT*ao f^ o r> fn o ^
O *T ^^ r** **< ^
^^ ^ f^ en \f> rn
a» ■— < -* r*. c* •-< 1
n <T -^T ** ■* "^ '
00 .-^ r4 (-^ O O
cj *^ r*^ t^ <*^ '"^
n fM fs r* *o i<^
O >A ^^ -^ "^ ^
O -9 A 9^ '^
tnoootn^f^ OcMoo^OcM *^**^'^"^^*^
flO *rt <H ^^ r*»
(si 00 ^ r^ (N sA
sO >T ^H 00 00 00
CJ O CO P^ o* ^
O r^i -* f^ 00 O
-J ^r -T -^T ^ •'^
e
o
u
■ CS <^ <Tt ^ P^
' d o*"**) -^
m O 00 '^ <^• <^
O t^ f** o* ^^ ^
H
gS
^4 9t p-l ^14 U^
fn o O "/^ '^ t/^
r>>.Or^CNa^r>k r>^^a^JflO^^'J
I I I
I ! I I I III
r^ r«* in «^ oo
«» O «***-• O 00
r* r> r*- O *^ O
O f^ '^ -^ "^ <"
r^ t/% m o ^o <s
OOM^O*^ r-trt^oOM^O
*n oo »n trt o <*<
^^ m <r <r w^ »^
(^ m (^ '^ <^ f^
O OO r». ir\ O O
s-
rsimr^OO--* nr^iTk.-io*'^ o-^oocJ'OO ^orj-nOr^O
OO^^'*''* (IJ«Nm^^r*<o -Hr^f^-^'^r^ aorMU^(lJO»-*
^^ <N n ■»» m >o
r- 00 <»* O <-t **^
f*l -nT t*^ "fi '^ oo
1-89
O^ -^ r^ '>f ^
00 v^ ^ >^ ^ oH
^ -^ ^ rsi r^ u^
o «r 00 kn if >tf
r^ »rt »i^ r* lO
c^ ^ O 3} 00 (M
iTt O ^O f^ *C ^»
r* r*. r^ f^ O O
\0 ^ tn <tf (^
1/^ ^4 nT o 00 >o
tn <N ff» -^ *A lA
00 t/> O <S <tf t/^
CO »T <*» (^ O
^ ^ ^ »* '^ ^
p^ <N f^ -» <r <r
*n n i-t O f*J 00
<N r^ m CM '«r
vn O f*^ tn O CO
00 t/> CM O O o
^ iT ^ ^O tA i-^
O OO o ^ >o
pv p«. m 00 -^T M^
*^ O* •— ( O sO O
<M r>i r«. fM r«4 o
r^^*n«»*^ aO(M%0ao^^r^ CMr^ootnr^oO iiO-^'Orsiao^o
IOO<N-^^ 0\es*r><.-^^^^^ -ji/iirttniocn (Mu^r^^-tp^-^r
IO^^(M<^ri> 9tr«4r^(M(M^^ <^t/l»A»O'.Ca0 ^^»TP»•o^<^■^
fMP^r4<*4o* cM**»<*ir^m<n (^nmnfn#n iT-*-*-T*n»n
O>|AO^0tn C^I^O'^^O^rt»n 00r«i»nf*»Oi/^ <M«^00\OCT*O
i ^^ ^-^ t^ ^ r^ Of*^<^fM^^^H mvo^^oooo «T'Oa)0<^<r
(sjooootOO o4r««»HrM^^r>4 rsi^^NAOOr^^ ^^^-tONOOOO
I^H^■4r*^t/^ao ^^f^»Tf*»pgr>i -^ \0 ^o >o r^ ^ r>sOOO»^m\o
psi<M«M<M(M (-ir^rimmrn (^np^p^r^^ ^-T<rir»u-»ir\
(N00'*lO»'»» \O'^a0^^tN»» *»p««r*r*.a*rsi >or--*ow»CT*<^
IOO*M«^>^ ^(Mr^oj^H»^ i~^*/^iO«^^0<Ti fMUioOCT^^H^
p^ p>j fM CM <M r^ (*i <*^ f^ fO rn f*^ **i f*i «^ f^ (^ -»j ij ^ -J' »/^ M^
r^ 00 **> ^^ .^
-* ^ O <-t '^ nO
r4 u-» ao o **^ »'*»
^^ <M r^ -* tr* >C
r*- 00 o* O —* fM
f^ »T «^ ^ ***■ 00
1-90
CO ^O O CN 00
O rsi O n r«» u-i
un vT CM ^ <^ <— '
m m ,j >T ^ ..y
u-i CN (n »c r«.
^ O '•O 00 M »j
s7 >0 ^^ ^ O O
o oo m r^ ON fN
l/^ M lA lA C«i
O r** O ^ O ON
O tM <T m r^ «*
i/i -.y i/i r^ ■«j i/i
(N O iJ^ CT^ ^ 1/^
1/^ \0 r«j ^-t (»>
CO ^ O ^ O O
r^ <0 ^ r^ ^ <T
I f^ ^-1 u^
^H 1/^ 0> P^- 00
^ ^ -^ 0\ r*i CT*
r«j vO un £N un O
-^ vO OS CN \0 -J-
+ ^n
CM
06
0\ r^ 00 vO ••?
m ON vO r- in r^
I \0 O f*l O r«.
vT rsi rsi m CN >3-
00 r*. ^ <N n
00 ON *T -^ (M ^H
O«Oa0^O^r^ p^inp-^Of^^
O -* «^ O tr>
rvi CN *T 00 f^ <-*
«/> ^H 00 r^ O oo
O .-H r^ O P^ oo
O* *n O ** ON
"O i/N o <r ^ <^
*fi t/N ov o f^ ^o
tTt 00 ^ 00 ^O -«?
f*N r^ r** -^ ^
sD vO p- -^ 1— t r^
r^ .-4 m tA 00 00
00 O 00 00 <— * \0
On On O ^^ O
On m rj n <f o
O O* vO o^ ON
c^i ir\ i/N i/N O *n
f^ ^ 00 ON o
I O ^ CM ^ f^
I CM CM CM CM CM
' OO ON 00 ^ ^H
fM o lA m m \o
O f^ p^ '^ CM ro
f-H CM fO -jT lA \0
^* O) ON O •-* CM
<*N -^ «/N \0 r«* OD
1-91
a
X
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
,-1 in
o -<
I O*
>
O
z
m ^ in NO -kT
rsi ^ n oo f*i
sC "7 vO i-H 00 9^
^ in -^ vo O O
lO ri CO CO fM po
lO t^ <N ON CO ^H
^ r* *3" O CM ON
NO 00 ^H <N fn ^ I
•7 -^ in m m in )
O NO o o NO r^
NO
00
ON
en
ON
o -<
ON ^T On m m
•«7 cH O* ON On f*^
in NO NO o r* •**
O f^ ^H 00 ON (N
g
z
u
5 ^
5 **-•
>
o
«n o o o ^
QN CO ^ ti*! NO
O <— t f^ "O ON
rs* CM es CM cN
CM 00 0^ CO 04 00
vO O »** ^ O «-t
a» 00 ••»■ (N o <*>
m r*. 00 00 o CM
d f*i f*i en liT *>j
CM n O »A O CM
ir» 00 o^ o cN u-i
n <*i t*i «^ «iT ^
00 r^ 00 00 00 ^^
00 u^ O "-^ m O
00
o
00
CM •
%0
I CM
CM m O ^O tA
O O f^ «r» 00
CM r^ CM CM <N
CM o **! "O 00 r-»
<r <n ^H (*! \0 .-I
•^ r-. 00 OO (7» CM
en C^ CO (*1 CO ^
vO ^a- ,— t r^ in ON
3
00 \0 OO 9« ^A
sO O -^r »n »rt •-*
o\ ut -^a- (-4 CM vo
m r^ GO CT\ ^H en
CO CO CO fO >T «^
m \0 oo -.J' u^ ON
rH U-1 00 '■a- NO
OS r^ CTv nO vO O
r- <n 00 ov o >r
«^ r-o r>- r» ON •— t
en <o (O (O en ^
I— I fo CO rM 1— I r^
0^ 00 ^H *o en
^o o <T un o csi
r* CTv •—) ON nO i-H
(TJ P*> 00 DO o <r
en en en *o ^ ^^
^f ^^ (SI en ON CJN
\0 O CM fo r^ »n
■*j- m m m t/^ »/^
00
\0 IT* r*- *j r*
<»■ >» ^^ O ON O
»A ON 00 r^ ^ NO
m r^ 00 CO o CM
en <o m en ^^ %j
NO -J- CM r-. o io
U^ <Jv CM m vO nO
•vj- -J- m in ir» un
00 c
(U o
.-ICMto^inNO r*.00ONO'-^f^
ro '^ in \o p*» CO
1-92
I I I
00
I
o^ r^ r^ <N o
I 00 a^ rj m 00
t iH rH CM Cvl r^
CO o CM o iH tn
o 00 u-i >a- m o
r^ O r-t ON O rH
rH in 00 O f-t CN
** <J- Sf lA 1/^ 1/^
I I I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I ! I I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
^ pH rn m o
iH rv. O in O r^
>3- 00 O VO 00 <t
i-( 00 \0 .H 00 CM
I a% o CN vr 00
1 tH psi es es c^j
n in r^ m ^o 00
n fn ro po fo fi
rg m r* o^ O CN
^ -d- ^ <r tn in
I I
I I
I I
I M I I i
I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I I I
•a
HI
3
C
C
o
u
-a-
c
u
l-I
m
<
60
o
<u
o
>
o
f^ ^ CM 00 00
o NO o m in o
o o 00 cs 00 m
r^ O CO »n »n o
I 00 Oi '
m 00 00 00 c4
iH CO SJ- CM iH iH
CO CO CO CO CO (O
m O O 00 f-H rH
ON \o r^ ON 00 ON
CM m vO GO On O
^ ^ ns- ^ >^ in
o rH m o to m
I ON o CM m 00
I ,H CM CM CM CM
CO -a- o o NO
CM *a in CO CM CM
CO CO CO CO CO CO
>a m NO O CM CM
CO m vo tn NO 00
CO CO CO CO CO CO
GO NO CM m o m
I ON On CM <J- NO
I iH iH CM CM CM
CM <r NO m NO GO
CO CO CO CO CO CO
CM m 00 CM ^ CM
>3- ^ ^ m in uo
On m CO o o m
O CO m CJN tH fH I
>a" -a- -a- ^ m m I
O
NO
CO
ON
6 -I
HI
00
a
NO
3
iH
iH
r^
O
>
00
NO
I I
I I
! I I I I I I
>
o
2
fH in u-i o in
m in in r^ in in
1^ o m -^r m cN
CT^ o in o m cN
lo^ocNjinr* f~i tn ^ m <r (*>
fO ^o vD vD r^ ON
CO ro ro r*^ CO CO
<N in r^ O rH CM
-4" ** ^ m m in
in o o in in
in m o\ in o in
o 00 o o o in
in pH o o o <N
icT^fHmmoo fH^^in^troi-i
trHcsicNfsir^ cocnmcomco
^ in ^o vo f^ ON
CO CO f^ CO CO CO
t-t <t r^ O cs CN
^ *^ <t in m m
o
CO
K
1
oo
g
iH
>
o
z
iH CM ^ o in
CM O O vO .H CS
vo "^ cr« r^ O »H
<j- vo o m m r*.
CM <r 00 o »H r4
^ '^ ^3- m m in
O
o
0)
00 c
(U o
iHrsiro^rmsO r-*00CT\O»HCM
CO -^r in \o r- 00
cr. o tH rsj CO <t in
iH CM (N CM CM CM CN
1-93
+ CN
OH
oO-cfOr^vO ocMO^mO f-)r-ir^o>or^
o i-H -^r ^ ^
CN CM <N CM CM
m p^ in r^ 00
I o O en in 00
I CN CM CM CM fsl
m tn ^ u^ en m
m m en en m en
I — *^ -fc^ r^ o 00
■XJ 00 00 00 I— I en
mm m en -a- <r
m in en tH ^ i'^
isO CT> I— I en in ^
^ ^ m m in m
OONinvooOi-i cncnm^cMin
CM
00
o
ON
00
o
00
\0 0^ f-l CN ^
O O en S.D o^
rsl CN CN CM CM
\C in en \D CM un
iH ^ in <t en rg
en m en en m m
in 00 in i-< v^ ^
<T ^ <x> CO c^ T-i
m en en en en *^
in -^ in O (7^ o>
O- 00 O .-H en n3-
^ <r in in in in
00
+ -H
O "^ esi in CTN
O O en m 00
(N <N Csi CM CM
O eo CM p- *^ -*
CM r*- CM CM
in r~- 00 00 ctn f— I
m en en m en -J-
CM in O CM -3" v^
00
ooenmr-^iH <rooin'^tMv£>
OI-^eO'^o^ cM-^in<reneM
rsieMCMcM<M menenenencn
-^ in O CM in o
in r^ 00 00 <f CM
rn en en en m -^
r-i ,-^ m c4 1-i in
O
<r
+
o
+
Oi
pd
XI
TJ
(U
a
i^
3
4-J
C
1-t
o
j-t
B
+
u
ai
^-^
1
•>
vT
ij
r^
<r
X
a>
1
ao
^
^
( )
•H
rH
+
•
UJ
U-4
Ov
,J
J-l
a;
CO
m
•
<
o
J3
H
Om
(V
CM 00 fO m en
I o O eo in 00
1 CM CM CM CM CM
I — -.J O »— ( '«D
0^ O CO in r^
rH CM C^ CM CM
vO en -^ \0 O
o o CM •<r r*
CM CM CM CM CM
p^ 00 O VD CM P^
,-( ^ «^ in ■<»■ cn
CO en en m en en
CM ^ rn r^ <T CM
rH m <r en CM CM
en CO en en en en
i-t o 00 in -^ »-t
^ <t ^n \rs <^ f*^
en en en en en en
CM CTN f— t CM rH O
in r^ 00 CO ctn rH
en rn r*^ o t^ <T
en CM CM p- en 00
^ \0 r- vD 00 o
en en en en en -^
CM 00 p^ en CM CM
p^ cjN CM en in
^ <j- in in in
vO ^ CM CM O CM
incT^in>d--*o -d-^o^cninco
^^^P^r^CT^'-^ ^TOOCTNiHCOm
mmenenen^ ^<3-<rininin
0)
i
o
>
vo 00 o <r o
<a- 00 p^ m CM m
in (M 00 o CT^ en
in ■'d" o '^ o^ I— I
I o o en in (TV
I CM CM CM CM CM
r-t en <r -^r e^ CM
en en m en en m
-^ vO r^ 00 00 iH
m m m en en <t
<t vO CT< O rH in
<t -sj- -^T in in in
en -^ in C30 a^
iH *^ CM iH p^ m
m CM CM o ON -cr
en CM o t— I vD in
o o CM -^r r^
CM CM CM CM CM
i-t <r v£> \o ^ en
en en en en en en
<r P-. 00 00 CO rH
en en en en en -sT
O .
+
I
[Z4
r-^ -^ in CM iH
CM o t— I u^ en M
O ON en 00 ON vD
sC en .H CJN O CM
ON O CM in CX)
,— I CM CM CM CM
in -4- r^ O CM
,-H m <r en cN fH
c*^ m en m c<^ c^
iH «H 00 eo a^ tn
^ o m O O f*^
c*^ ^£) C7S O >-H en
<i- <r -.a" in in in
^ CM in en in 1— t
I <J\ O CM vO CO
I ,-4 CM CM CM CM
CM -a- -* <r CN CM
en m en cn en en
<r 00 a^ M en \£)
-a- -^ -^r m m in
o
o
00 c
0) o
hJ n
tH CM en ^r in \o
P-* 00 ON O 1-f CM
en -.J- in vD p^ oo
CT^ O iH CM en ^ in
,-H CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-94
00 rO un \C t— I
1 O r-t ro \0 O
I CN CM CM CN) m
fo -^r t-H in vo r*-
nH ro m iH 00 rsi
>x> 00 o> O t— ( ^
ro m ro -^ <r <r
m o u") in i-H t*i
00
r^ 1-H CN 00 CN
O r^ a> ^o O r-v
o f-t tn m cr>
CM rsl (N CN CN
CO -^ T-t ^ in m
in 00 ov a^ o f*^
fO ro rn c*^ -.T <r
r^ ro 00 O "-D O
en
00
.— I m m r-* CT^
I r-H iH rn v£) ^
t CM CM CN CN fM
\D iTt t^ a^ -^ \o
o -^ <T) m cN fsi
vO 00 CT\ CTN i-H -^
ro m m m v3- >^
ro r* »^ in (N m
o r^ (N p^ <r
>^ O CM CN m ^o
00 cr* ^£) o^ I— I m
r-^ CTi o (N f*^ CO
I ^ i-l ^ v£3 O
1 CM CN CM (Si rO
vo 00 ON (T. iH m
m m m m 'J- <r
vo ON CM -^ r-- 00
-J- ^ m m in m
^D m \o CM -^r
VD CM nH in 00 ^H
<r ^ in <■ CO r-i
m OS en s^ ^o r^
O fH en ^ CT^
r^ CM CM C^ CM
CM in vo in m en
en m en m en en
in r^ 00 00 o en
en en en en -^ *4-
in 00 iH CM r^ lO
-^ -<r m m vn m
00
m
VO
+
CM
+
Bi
J3
■a
OS
a
J
<u
u^
T3
o
^-^
F
3
4-1
u
fH
O
in
K
c
(U
o
+
o
u
/— N
r
a:
vr
(11
r^
Oi
M
•
•»
0^
OJ
r
^
iH
^M
u
60
f-4
«>
3
•H
U4
f-H
+
.H
u
14-1
•H
4J
b:
.
r 1
<
m
J3
H
o
Oh
<U
►J
rg r^ \o en r^
00 ^ r^ CM p^ o^
en 00 00 ^£) ^o cN
CO 00 O CO O^ iH
o o CM m CO
CM CM CM Csl C^J
CM "^ a^ CM i-l
i-H m »o v^ -* en
en en en en en en
r^ in en ^ \o o
in r-» 00 00 o CM
en en m en -.T -vj"
CM rH 00 a» r^ O
-a- 00 ^ CM -cr r^
>3- >^ m m m in
in vo 00 CM o -^
CM \0 O ON CM
O 0^ O -J VO O
in 00 00 00 o en
en en en en -^ >^
a> rH O 00 iH
I o o en m o^
I CM CM CM CM CM
m 00 o^ 00 o CM
en en en en -d" -^r
in 00 o CM -d- ^o
-d" <r m in in in
CM p^ in vo -d- 00
m 00 o CM -T >o
•d" >cr in in m m
o in 00 o OS
in -^ -^ CT^ CM m
cN <r CM vD <r OS
in vO -sT »-* <7\ o
1 rH iH en r>. r^
I CM CM CM CM CM
en m \o in -^ en
(^ f) (^ f*^ c^ c*^
vo r^ 00 00 a^ CM
en en en en en -^
^£3 00 1— I CM en in
<T •'d" in in in in
CM
00
a:
<u
O'^vDQOr^ CMi/iQ^^^Q^QO ONincMcMvoo oin<rr^<NCM
I O O CM ^ P^
I CM CM CM CM CM
•<r r^ oo 00 (T. CM
en en en en en ^
m r-* o CN in r>.
<r -cr in in in m
00 <r in in in
•^ r^ O in 00 CM
in -sf in in I— ) m
m CM -d- -cf r- «-H
I O iH en v£> (j\
I CM CM CM CN CM
in r-- CO oo o CM
en en en en ^ ^
in <x) o CM <r vD
'd- ^ in in in in
+ en
o 00 vo en rH
I o o CM in 00
t CM CM CM CM CM
iH CM en r- <t r-
CM in vo m <f en
en en en en en en
vo -^r ^ <r o o
m r- 00 00 o CM
en en en en ^ ^3-
00 o f^ v£> CM CM
■<r 00 o CM in r-
-d" ^ m m in m
iH CM en ^3- u-i vo
r^ 00 ON O tH CM
en ^ in vo r^ oo
CT» o <H CM m ^ in
i—i CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-95
#
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I I
-a-
I
I I I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I
I I
in o^
00 VO
00 +1
in \^ \o f^ ^o
iri 00 ^ ^ o m
,H o m r^ r^ vo
O vO in CTv CM 0^
rH iH CO in r--
<M CM (N r^ CM
ON iH ^ m ^a- CM
CN ro n en n fn
^ ^o ^o m r^ CM
en en r^ en m ^
•<r r^ CT^ o iH I— )
<r •* *3" m m m
I o
>
O
z
O CM CM »X> 'd-
CM CM ^ v£) CO
CM CM CM CM CM
fH CT* cn m m m
O C3^ r- 00 fH VD
m fH en o m CM
fH en ^ ic -a- en
rn en m r<) m en
in so r^ r^ O en
en en en en -^ *3-
vx) OS fH CM en <r
•s^ -^ in in m in
H
k]
Pu
t
iJ
w
[><
o
en
H
4^
7^
X
Ul
60
§
•H
fH
b:
lu
3
(U
to
U
<
Oi
u
S
^-s
f)
CO
u
s-^
>-l
CM -
I CM
I
O
u
-^ 00 vO -H fO
in 00 r-* r* I — r--
CN o^ ro f^ ••T f^
O -d- n-i CO CO <r
I ^ ,-( f^ ^O 00
1 (M CNJ Csl CN fM
00 O O i-H (N
1 ^ rg -^ \o oo
1 C'4 csi csi csj rsi
E
U
^D v£) O *H CN
O (N ■'^ l/l n CM
r-i n cn cn fn n
00 -^ \o u^ f*^ in
^ in vo \0 CO es
m CO m fo m <r
o CO <r <N 1-H m
"^D CO O O O CM
<r -J- m in u*i in
r*. i-H CN iH <r o
CNJ fH cN c^j fo m
m (N -^ ON c^i 00
O f^ CN) O v£)
iH CN -^ ^ 00
eM CM CN CM CN
tH in cs in *cr
iH <T vD *^ ^ c^
r*i rn CO f*i CI CO
^ vO r-^ vO O en
m en en m ^ -^^
r- CT^ iH .H CM CM I
^ <r m in in m t
ONCNONr^CMr^ rOrHCMONOOON
r^ m CN rH in CM
CM CN <t vO CO
CSJ (M CM CM CM
m f-H r- vo a>
o -* ^D vo in m
en en en m fn en
•*^ r*- o^ r-^
vD a^ in CM vo in
vO ON rH CM en <r
^ <r in m in in
in in -*3" i-H >sO o>
i-( CN fn in r^
(Nj CM CM rsl CM
-•a' m sD p^ cx) iH
CO en en en eo -"^
in CO O *H rH CM I
*^ <r in in m in i
o
>
U4 •
o
o
O tH o o o
-j"r-tONvDfHr- oor^ONinr^p^
OS -a" -^ v£> en iH
CN CM -.a- v£) 00
CM CM CM CM CM
O en in -sD in en
en en en en en en
<r \£) r*- r^ ON CM
m en en en en <r
m 00 o .H en -T
>3- <f in in in in
so
-3" ON nO ON *^
rH ^ m in 00
CM CM CM CM CM
\^ O CM en en in
o -^ in m en CM
en en en en en en
S.D ON tH CM r^ iH
-a- in vD vD r-* csi
en en en en en *;f
O en en ) — ^ ^d en
r^ 00 o O O »H
vT '^ m in in in
P
O en CM m en
vo r^ 00 p^ o -^
<r r^ en oo p^ en
^ vO vD vO 0> tH
en en en en en <r
o m CM «H vo en
in 00 tH CM CM en |
-J -vT in m m in i
eo c
01 o
«H CM en <r in *o
r^OOONO'HCM en*;Tin^£)r^OO
cT> o .— t CM m -a- in
I— I CM OJ C^J CM CM CsJ
1-96
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I
I I
X:
o On >a- CO en
O O CM ^ VO
CN CN rsl CN CNI
m in 00 00 in 00
CO ro ^ v£) ^ r^
CO -» ~3- ^ vo O
n ro CO CO m >:3-
00 in en r* r^ CO
00 ON o
sj- -a- m
O 00 00 oo c:^
NO CN rH W -3-
CJN iH m CN ^ ^
c^ c^ <^ c^ c^ e^
CO CO O VO P^ CM
CN o rg CO O rsi
CO r^ r^ 00 a> fH
<r >j <r -^ -^ m
o
CO
CM m -a- iH o
O O CM ^ so
CM CM CM CM CM
CM VD O SO CO CM
00 O -a- CO EN ^
CM m CO CO CO CO
r^ O tH »H -a- OS
CM ** -a- -a in 00
CO CO CO CO CO CO
OS O ^ 00 OS so
O in m so 00 OS
^ ^ 'J- >3- >a ^
•a
u
3
c
•H 4J
B 00
O -H
I
1
u
M
<:
H
o
<u
o
CO
r~ OS
<Js
CM ■»* m so so
I O O CM ^ r^
I CM Csl CM CM CM
CM CM CO m OS
so CO O so ^T
I rH .H CO ^ r~
I CM CM CM CM CM
^ r-t m in o CM
OS iH to CO m »H
CN CO CO CO CO CO
OS SO O iH O CO
OS CM >a CO rH fH
CM CO CO CO CO CO
CM CM m ^ o m
CJS fH ^ CO CM iH
CM CO CO CO CO CO
m m CM f^ CM iH
CN <r ^ CO so 00
CO CO CO CO CO CO
so o so CO in vo
f^ ^ m m CM CO
CO iH r-t OS so OS
CM m r-^ r-- 00 OS
>a- <r -a ^ ^ >a-
csi p^ 00 m 00 r^
CM m so 00 OS o I
■^ -3- -a- -3- -a- m I
so 00 00 OS OS so
O CM so so 00 OS
>3- -3- -a- -a -3- -a-
o
>
00
so
O
00
so
00
o
>
o
m so so so o
o m o r^ CO cjs
00 OS m m CO m
m CO so OS ^3 CM
o rt CO m 00
CM CM CM CM CM
O CO m CO CM i-t
CO CO CO CO CO CO
CO >3- ^ ^ so CO
CO CO CO CO CO CO
CO m so r^ 00 OS
-3- sr -3 -a- <• -a-
00
so
I 1 I i I ! I I I I I I III
>
o
o >o (N vt <r
CN| ON iH vO v£> CM
ON Cs) v£) ^ CM *H
CM n n m CO ro
■<r fo o CM r>. \D
IN m »n m (X5 tH
CO CO CO m en ■<}■
I— I 00 in On rH 0^
m vD r-. (X> o <T»
^T <r ^ -J- in sr
CM
O
Qi o
I— t CM CO -.^ m \o
r^ <» CT\ O i-H CM
CO »^ in vD r^. 00
ON O t-( CM CO *^ m
rH CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-97
On
b:
,t
J2
,-1
-^ p^ in o ^.D
ON o^ ^ <r o
r* c^j in m o f^
o^ r-i *^ <T fo e^j
(Nl f^ f*^ d f^ f^
\o in ^ r»* ro c*^
<t 00 in <^ CM o
r^ O c> r^ O r^
I— I r^ O CM in o>
-J vO CTv O i—t i-H
>^ <f -a" in in in
** o ^ "^ <— I ^
I ^ r-i m in r^
i rsj CM CM rsj o^
ON CM m in <r CO
csi en CO m CO m
^ r- r^ r^ O «H
en CO m en ^ <t
in 00 ON tH CM en
^a* *J <r m m in
00
ON fH ov 00 en
\o ON en o m 00
VO in CM iH f— I iH
tn o r^ I — c?N ON
O r-l CM -sj- r-*
rNl CM CM CM CM
ON rH m ^ CM rH
CM cn cn cn cn en
en in »^ '^o CX3 o
en en en en en <t
-^ r- 00 CTv o^ «-! I
<r <T <r <r <r in i
ON
o
+ ^
m in en CM o
en (M 00 CO r^ in
o^r^oooNCJO ONNoencMinoN
I ^ ^ m m r^
I CM CM CM CM CM
^ r- ON rH CM -*
^ ^ <r in in m
<r r* CM en -^
00 o ON \D en r^
^ r«- in r^ r-^ CM
ON in o ''O r^ en
•a
u
O
3
4-1
C
■H
o
4-1
C
+
o
u
B5
1
^
iJ
in
j:
1
ao
<.)
•H
(H
u
*4-l
►J
4J
CO
<:
H
CU
ON
CM
+ o"
I i-H ^ en in r-
t CM CM CM CM CM
00 o ON -sa- -^
00 m CM CM ON CO
■^ m \D \o t^ 1-i
en c^ <m ^^ ^ -^
\£) t-H v£> tH ON en
en r- ON ON o I— I I
-* <■ >j <T in in I
>d" CM o f^J en o
+
Xi
<U
1*4
u
•H
u
( r-4 CM m in r-N.
I CM CM CM CM CM
m 00 ON >* O
ON CM in in en CM
CM en eo en en CO
m CM \0 ON 00 en
^ r- r- P-- ON CM
en en rn en en <r
en ON ^j- <r in oo
m 00 O r-H CM m
^ ^ in m in m
CM OO O vO ON -J"
O O CM <r n£>
CM CM CM CM CM
*d- CM 00 OO NO
00 •-( en CM rH .-(
CM en cn en en cn
•^ ON ON CM o en
m vD CM in in en
in vO C3N CJN ON O
•<r -cr -^ ** -4" in
O ON 00 O ON vO
I .H iH CM ^ v£>
( CM CM CM CM CM
ON *-( en *a" en CM
CM m en en en cn
en in NO nd cx) CM
cn en cn en cn >^
<J- v£) 00 o O CM
<t •<?■■<»■ in in m
(U
m
R
^
3
ON
-H
vO
O
>
CJN
00 r-i vo in r-*
r^ O CM O CM rH
t^ m -^ 0\ CM CM
vo 00 in ON r^ ON
00 f-H en -^ cn CN
CM cn en en cn cn
m in vD in 00 o
m cn m cn cn "^
en sO On ON O r^
<r -cr ^ -d- in in
in m CM CM CM
<t ON in 00 ON r^
cn "^ in NO r^ in
cjN 00 in ON NO o
fH iH cn in r-^
CM CM CM CM CM
ON »H ^ ^f cn CM
CM en en en cn en
^ 1,0 l"^ r^ On rH
cn en cn en cn ^
•^ iH ON O »H en
-J -^ -sT m in m
in On 00 00 iH
ON ^J O On ON -^
r^ iH r-. -^ NO 00
>X) 00 nO no 00 00
ON
+ "
00
pa
Xi
(U
O O cn <r r^
CM CM CM CM CM
00 CM o in NO
r^ in ON en r*- I— t
00 •-* en en rsi CM
CM en cn en cn cn
en m in in r^ O
cn m en m cn -nT
cn r^ no e*^ no CM
m in vo NO cx) t-t
cn m m cn en -J-
-^ vO 00 CTn O i-(
-^ -^ -"S" ^ in in
CM 00 CM CM in CM
-^ \0 ON o iH en I
>3- ^ -d- m in in I
O
OJ o
f-4CMcn'.3-inNO r-oooNOrH
fH rH
m *^ in NO p^ 00
ON o rH CM m <r m
rH CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-98
n O 00 o fM
I fH CM ro vO CO
I CN pg CM CM CsJ
CN in in CTN tN r*-
O O r- o O O
u-i r^ r-. CO O ^
fO CO CO fO *.tf ^
00 r^ On ^ -^ CM
r-^ O CN m -^ in
<r in in in in in
ON
O
00
+ rH
CM o ^ <T in
I (N CN en m r^
I eg CM (N rsl CM
si" a^ O ^ Oi (M
in CO CO -^ vO o
■^ r^ 00 00 ON en
CO en CO en fO ^
r-» ON iH en *3- in
■<r -^r in in in in
ON
r- in vD ON •»*
^ rsj o ON CO fH
en CO CM in es M3
vD <■ CN MD vO *J3
( T-t eg m <r r^
I CM CM r-j CM rj
+ -H
cN en CM m ^
r- ON m in o r^
r-* <r CM CM en CM
CM 00 O O CM CM
tn r-. CO 00 o en
en en en en >j -^
r- ON CM en <r in
^ ^ m in m in
O
00
^d- ON ^ in .H
ON in o en ON r^
CM ON r^ r-. CM vo
<r iH in o ON o
.— I ^ en in 00
eg CN CM CM CM
^ m vO >^ On .-(
en en en en en -sj
in 00 o rH .-I en i
•<r <3- m in in in I
vO
+
CM
+
od
J2
•o
a:
<U
,-1
<u
b.
■a
o
s-'
c
3
4-t
tj
iH
CJ
in
c
(U
o
+
U
u
r.
cd
-3-
m
I
r^
o:
u
0^
m
in
4J
fH
U-t
1
X
fH
F.
u
oc
fH
n
3
•H
CT\
u
U4
t-H
+
iH
h
-J
»4^
•H
CO
■u
s:
•
n
<
m
J3
H
o
U4
iJ
r-^ONinoNvo f-t-^oooeotH
in p^ ^ in i-H <r
m 00 On CM CM 00
I .— ( (H en m r^
I CM CM CM CM CM
v3- 1— I P^ ~3- vO
00 r^ ON o in -J
^ >,D r-» r-. o en
en en en en «^ -^
O CO 00 O CM >:r
vO 00 o eg en -^
<r >3- m in in in
O vO rH iH r^ -^
I .— I rg -vT m r^
I CM CM CM CM eg
CO en CM CM O
ON CM -^ in en CM
CM en en en en CO
NO 00 -^ CO en ^
m m NO r-^ C3N CM
en en m en en -^T
en en r- r^ O CM
vD 00 O ^ ^ CM 1
•^ ^ in in in in i
B
3
^ -* ON O ON O
I fH eg <r \D 00
I CM CM CM CM CM
m p^ r^ r-» O en
en en en en N.^ ^
I— I in CM ON en
»-t sa- iH O 00 C7N
NO <!■ 00 -"T CM CM
r^ <r 00 en iH -^
I iH iH en -J- p^
I CM eg CM eg CM
en in in no 00 .-t
en en en en en "fcT
■^ P*- ON o I— t <H
•^ -<r ^ in in in
O
NO
i-H
0)
■O- 00 <T CM CO
nO O iH in iH O
NO NO ON CM 00 r^
NO NO p^ en in CO
■^ NO NO r>* 00 1-4
en en en en en "^
m 00 ON I— ) CM en
^ <r ■** in m in
iH NO iH <t NO
in o\ en in rH CM
i-H r- -^ ON \o in
O en ON in <jN iH
I t-t fH en in r^
I CM CM CM CM eg
•^ in NO NO 00 rH
en en en en en «^
m p^ ON o o en
^ -.d- <r in in in
+ en
■-t
oi
r**> 00 o CM ON
CM en 00 -* rH ON
CM p-* en o p^ O
NO \D ON vO 00 CM
I .H fH en in NO
I CM CM CM CM CM
^ ^ p- r-^ 00 iH
en en en en en ^
*^ p^ ON rH CM en
••d' ■'d" ^ in in in
0)
(U o
rHcMcn-^rmNO p^ooonOtHcm en..3-inNOP-»oo
cjN O fH CM en >d- in
fH CM CM CM CM CM CM
1-99
TABLE C-6.- CALF-CIRCUMFERENCE AND LOWER-LIMB-VOLUME DATA FOR INDIVIDUAL
APOLLO CREWMEMBERS IN A RESTING, SUPINE POSITION^
Apollo Crew-
mission member
Preflighc evaluations
F - 15 F - 5
Preflighc sunmary
Mean tSD
Postflight evaluations
Second Third Fourth
Resting supine mean calf circumference, cm
7
CDR
CMP
LMP
8
CDR
CMP
LMP
9
CDR
CMP
LMP
10
CDR
CMP
LMP
H
CDR
CMP
LMP
15
CDR
CMP
LMP
18
CDR
CMP
LMP
17
CDR
CMP
LMP
Group
mean
±SD
40.7
35.9
36.6
35.2
39.7
37.3
37.0
40.5
36.4
36.3
37.8
38.1
36.6
37.2
37.9
40.3
36.5
37.5
38.1
34.4
36.3
38.0
38.8
38.6
37.57
1.621
40.9
35.9
36.9
35.3
39.4
36.8
37.0
40.2
35.1
37.1
37.5
36.0
36.8
38.3
40.5
36.3
37.1
37.9
34.4
36.3
38.2
38.1
39.1
37.44
1.724
40.8
35.9
36.1
35.4
39.4
37.2
36.8
40.1
36.2
35.9
37.0
37.0
36.2
38.1
37.6
40.5
36.5
37.4
38.0
34.8
36.3
38.5
38.6
38.9
37.47
1.625
40.8
35.9
36.5
35.3
39.5
37.1
36.9
40.3
36.3
35.8
37.3
37.5
36.3
37.4
37.9
40.4
36.4
37.3
38.0
34.5
36.3
38.2
38.5
38.9
37.47
1.634
0.10
.00
.40
.10
.17
.26
.12
.21
.14
.61
.44
.55
.31
.67
.35
.12
.12
.21
.10
.23
.00
.25
.36
.25
40.1 *
34.7
35.1 i
34.9 t
39.1
36.8
35.2 *
38.9 *
34.7 *
34.6 *
36.2
35.6 *
35.6
37.0
37.6
39.3 t
35.6 i
36.0 i
36.6 i
33.5 *
35.6
37.3 *
37.0 i
37.4 I
36.43
1.688
p < 0.05
40.1
35.6
36.0
35.2
39.1
36.7
35.9
40.2
38.1
35.6
37.1
36.5
39.4 *
35.1 *
36.5 *
36.6 t
33.5 »
35.6
36.6 *
37.0 »
37.5 +
36.85
1.719
34.4
39.1
37.2
36.4
40.4
36.1
40.1
35.9 t
36.7 *
36.5 t
33.2 *
35.4
38.1
38.1
38.1 *
37.05
1.995
40.8
35.9
36.3
37
.3 1
37
.0 t
37
.6 »
37
.48
1
.743
Lower limb volume, ml
.Group mean
CDR
15 929
15 485
15 669
15 694
223
14 108
i
14 146
i
13 770 *
13 812
CMP
12 577
12 492
12 798
12 622
158
12 150
i
11 898
+
12 005 *
12 146
LMP
14 556
14 794
14 741
14 697
125
14 482
14 033
+
14 068 *
13 806
CDR
17 265
17 685
17 991
17 647
364
16 772
16 427
*
17 238
16 706
CMP
17 426
17 132
17 357
17 305
154
15 964
+
16 366
1
17 028
16 424
LMP
17 944
18 542
18 030
18 172
323
17 084
i
17 692
17 878
17 189
I
15 950
16 022
16 098
16 023
15 093
15 094
15 331
15 014
2 059
2 218
2 089
2 113
t-test
1 873
n.s.
2 116
n.s.
2 371
n.s.
2 035
n.s.
w. Hoffler and R. Johnson
NASA SP-368, in press.
b
Apollo flight Crew Cardiovascular Evaluations. Ch. 4 of Biomedical Results of Apollo.
Arrows indicate probability p < 0.05.
n.s. - not significant.
I-lOO
s
u
^
O 00
iH r
I I
I
0)
.-I
O
-* 00
I
CO
I
I O 0^
CM
I
§ ^
e
00
CM
o
i-l
r-
CM
CM CO
00
i-t
r^
iH
1 "^
r~
.H VD
«k
CM
CO
CO
\o
1 U-,
vr
vr <r
•
CM
cs
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM CM
1-1
td
«
CD
o
>
4-1
c
0)
o
l4
(U
D.
BJ
H
H
Q
CM
00
Pu
m
hJ
CM CO
*k
U
1
•
•
W
I
1 •
PM
1
* •
(— t
1
<-{
CO
1
1 CM
1
1
<r 1
o
1
1
>
x:
00
CM 00
o
o
I
i-H
0^
VO
-*
00
00
CM
0^
CO
e
O
CO
0^
VO
1
cr>
o
00
Cv
CM
CM
CM
c^
1
VO
r>.
m
VO
M
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
CM
•
(d
CO
CO
iH
•
O
(U
>
c
•H
iH
0)
tn
1
iH
+
CM
VO
1
iH
+
CM
+
VD
1
iH
+
CM
+
Z'
pu
1^
oi
fn
Pd
PS
p^
Di
Pi
I-lOl
u
e
9)
U
U
0)
o
>
i-H n m ON o
iH -a- C-) cr. CN
I rH I rH
I 1
rH 00 CM CM 00
I I
?t
CO 1-1 o- in o
I
I O 'H tsi CN
I I
B
o
o r-i m iH cr>
m CM m 00 ro
iH PO CM ro
I I I I
CO o> m ^ oo
I CM I v£> CN
I I
o m vo o
-* iH 00 r~
I
T3
(U
3
C
O
>
tH iH O VO O CM
CO vo tH r- in (T>
00 00 r- ■* m -3-
CM CM CM CM CM CM
CO
CM CTv en r~ vD -*
r~- VO »3" vD o »*
VO vD in vo in m
CM CM CM CM CM CM
Cd
-* CM <]• CT\ O ~3-
CT\ 00 cn O 00 CM
<r -* in in in vr
CO CO CO CO CO CO
CO
c
o
I
w
<
E-i
CO
1
to
B
o
o
>
e
<■ .H O r^ O
00
{
H
Ft,
U
I I
iH O CM VO CM
vO 00 CM CO
I I I I
H
►J
in c^^ o O vo
I iH i-H CM CM CM
I I I
u
•^
vO iH >» 00 iH
•s,
•
O
1 -3- vo in r- CM
T CM CO CO -a-
1 1 1 1
(Hi
>
o^ m >* o ON
CM vO CM r-- 00
I I
r^ O CM rH ^
^ vO vO vD 00
00 CM p^ «* o r^
CM 00 vo r^ m o
CM T-l CT\ 00 OO 00
CO CO CSl CM CM CM
CO
in »* o i-H m VO
-a- r~ 00 CM r^ m
r-» r-» m m vo vo
CM CM CM CM CM CM
CO
CO vo CO in -a- CM
r^ CM i-t CO CO cj>
O O O iH iH CT\
CO CO CO CO CO CM
CO
o
>
vo m tH CM CO >a-
I I + + + +
fz^ fL, Pi (Hi Pi ei
VO m rH CM CO -a-
I I + + + +
fn (^ Pi eii Pi Pi
vO m iH CM
1 1 + +
CO vt
+ +
s
F-l
0)
cn
to
PQ
PL4 fH PJ PS
cti ed
1-102
c
0)
y
u
<u
a.
o
>
iH ^
O CM
I
v£> 00 U-) -3-
-* ro -a-
I I I
u-i r^ iH ro 1-^ m
iH CM CM
>4-l
m.
cs \0
lO f^ iH fO
iH VO m -^ -3- f^
<u
•
1 lO 1
>-* iH 00 O
iH iH CM m VD
kJ
^
%
1
tH I iH
1 1
(U
C
o
>
in n r^
CO ON CO
fO CO fO
CM eg CM
CM -d- VD -3-
lO Csl LO CO
CO CM CN Csl
CM CM CM CM
00 CO CM i-( rH sf
-* in vD cTs o -a-
CO CO CO CO ^ CO
CM CM CM CM CM CM
C
o
I
u
t
c
(U
u
(U
CI.
o
>
Pi
r~ iH
Q
• •
U
CM 1
si-
O r^ CM
CM
I
o <r CO CM cjN <r
1-H iH CO CN
m CO
vo I
o
>
-a- CM 00 CM CTi
CO CO r^ r-
iH
00 o
CO
sr r~ cTi
CM t~- in iH m CM
S
CJ> CO
CO
1 CO VO CO
CO ^ vD 1-1 o -a-
-* -a-
sr
1 sr CO <r
<r -a- sj- m m -a-
*
CM CM
CM
CM CM CM
CM CM CM CM C>4 CN
•
CO
iH
O
>
Q
o in
CO ,H
I I
<a-
I
fa
i-H r>.
in 00 CO m
I I I I
o iH csi sr m rH
+ + + + + +
p:; Cci ix; ptj Bd p::
0)
cT
1-103
4J
g
^1
ro
r~
rH r--
O 00
v£)
.H iH
cjN -a- iH
0.
1
cA 1
1
7-f
1—1
CM
1
CM CO
1 1
• • •
I 1
•
1
iH
<
s
M
ed
■^
4J
M-l
(U
•
i-i
O
1
T !
00 00
in CM
1 rH
1
<1- CM
CM CM
CO 1
1
1— 1
1
00 <r
in 00
1 1
O 1-1 iH
in f-l c*i
1 1 1
<u
D
C
a
o
I
u
w
.-)
<
(U
3
C
C
o
o
>
c
o
CU
o
>
CM en CM
iH O O
CM CM CM
to
•d- ~a- 00 o
<r r~. t^ 00
vD m n v£>
CM CM CM CM
r-l •* 00 CM tH rH
ro <r i-t m ON 1^
vo **D VD ^ ^ *»D
CM CM CM CM CM CM
H
CO
O CT>
rn I*
CO
CM
r~ 00 in fH vf cn
CN
I
I I
J-l
#^
x:
•
r-( -^r 1
1 CO 1
1 \o r~- CO CM CM m
00
T-{
00 CM 1
1 ^o 1
1 <• r- rH 1 I-l m
•H
O
1
1 1 1
Cii
>
vO 1-1
in
00
00 00
O
1 VO
r^ vo
r^
1 r-
CM CM
CM
CO
CM
(Ti 00 00 m CO o
in CM i-t o cjN <T
vo vO r^ r^ vo r^
CM CM CM CM CM CM
O
>
o <u
CO CO
tn 13
o in
en iH <r
I I I
m 00 en in
I I I I
O iH CM -* in iH
+ + + + + +
Pi pi pi Pi Pi cc;
c
(1)
tn
(0
1-104
c
u
1-1
<a
a.
u-i
O iH 00 r^
CNJ 1-1 I
CN ,H CM CN fO •*
n in vo vo CO m
e
u
CO
%
(U
VO ON
r^ in CO r^
-a- CM .H iH
o
>
m CO ^ m 00 in
r^ i-l <■ -3- r^ CN
rH iH iH r-t
T3
(U
TD
D
iH
U
B
O
u
I
u
u
m
<
■a
(U
•o
3
rH
O
C
o
u
e
O
ro
<r
r-(
o>
CM
r^
CJ> CM
00
C7>
eg <Ti
in
CO
CM
r^
o\
-a-
O
o> -d-
\D
VO
o -a-
*
-a-
CO
CO
CO
CM
CO
CO
CO -a-
■a-
~a-
-a- -a-
•
CM
Cv|
CM
CM
CM
CJ
CVJ
CM CM
CM
CN
CM CM
1-4
ea
O
>
4J
c
(U
O
i-l
H
(U
iJ
o.
Oi
r~.
CM
1
f
in
CO
m
O r^
-a-
O
-a- r-t
•
iH
CM
1
1
1
CM
r
CM eg
CM
CO
CM CO
rH
O
>
•a
•H
•
o
>
CM m 1
-* m 1
1 ro r^ CO
1 VD 1 rH
O f^ rH m rH 00
m VO vo r-. vo 1^
t
r~
O
m
<t
vO
o
m
in
m
CM
CM
CM
00 00 00
VO CTi rH
m -a- m
C^J CM CM
m CM VD O vO CO
m r^ vo 00 vo 00
m m m m lO m
CM CM CM CM CM CM
o
>
c
O (U
CO cd
CO 13
O u-1
CO rH
I I
-a-
I
rH r^
m 00 CO m
I I I I
O rH CM <r UO rH
++++++
cri eii oi Pi oi Pi
01
c
CO
1-105
N79-11736
CHAPTER II
VARIABILITY IN HUMAN BODY SIZE
by
James F. Annis
Webb Associates
A century ago, human engineering was a virtually unknown concept. In
schools and homes, on assembly lines and military front lines, the item was
paramount and its user secondary. If the operator could not be rammed into
the workspace, then the operator was dispensible. Little notice was taken
of the high cost in speed, efficiency, accuracy, endurance and safety which
was paid in the use of tools and equipment ill-fitted to the hands, legs,
eyes and backs of diverse operators. As late as World War II, the design
of gun turrets for bombers was dictated so single-mlndedly by the
air frame configuration and performance requirements established for the
aircraft that the number of men who could be found to fit into the turret
was severely limited.
With the advent of ever more sophisticated technology, such a disregard
for the hviman factor is no longer possible and a knowledge of man's size
and its variability has become progressively more critical in the design
of clothing, equipment and workspaces. Stresses involving posture, position
and pressure imposed on an operator will result inevitably in an unhealthy
body performing a far less than optimum job. We can no longer afford a random
matching of men and machines; there are, after all, no dispensible operators
on a space flight.
The problems of designing for a highly variable population are, of
course, immense but not insuperable. The key to the solutions lies in a
thorough acquaintance with the problem.
One has only to view a group of people to be struck by the range of
diversity in the size and shape of mankind. This diversity, often visually
aesthetic, can be a source of annoyance to the designer. For those involved
in design problems, the human body seems to have an inordinate number of
irregularly curved and angular depressions and projections, as well as an
assortment of appendages, all of which tend to impede a straightforward de-
sign solution. Computer models have historically represented man as a series
of cylinders, cones and spheroids, but ordinarily the designer should not.
Despite the quality of the subject material, the designer of equipment
and systems must arrive at a design solution which will be adequate to accom-
modate the irregularities of size, shape and mobility of potential users.
It is of value, therefore, to have as detailed a quantification of body size
variability of the design population as possible.
II-l
One can, in general, classify the total human morphological variability
into three broad categories: intra-individual , inter-individual, and secular
variability. Intra-individual variability, as used here, pertains to those
size changes or effective size changes that occur in an individual during
his or her adult life. Some size changes such as those related to the aging
process and nutrition occur slowly; others are temporary or transient such
as those precipitated by movement or the environment. Intra-individual size
variability also includes right side-left side asymmetry and the effect of
personal protective clothing on functional body size. Of unique concern to
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) engineers are the
changes which occur in the human body under zero-g and high-g conditions.
The differences between the sexes represent a major source o f inter-
individual variability with the female having, in general, a smaller overall
body size, less strength and less rugged features than the male. A second
source of such variability lies in ethnic and racial origins. The reader may
obtain a general visual impression of the diversity of males and females of
the three principal racial groups by examination of Figure 1. Although some
artistic liberties have been taken in the figure, each representative body
form was scaled to mean dimensional data utilized later in this chapter.
Obviously a greater amount of difference could be demonstrated if extreme
values had been used.
While all living people belong to a single biological species, the
species, like other life forms, is not geographically uniform; it is differ-
entiated into a number of local variants or breeding groups. These variants
frequently differ in a number of morphological traits such as skin, eye and
hair color, body size and proportions, with a particular trait often highly
characteristic for a single variety. It is not necessary here to probe for
the reasons behind these morphological differences between variants of man
but only to acknowledge their existence and attempt to deal with them in
terras of sizing and design requirements. This variability is of some impor-
tance here because of the many ethnic and racial groups that constitute the
American population as well as the potential design population in the NASA
space program.
For reasons that are not always very clear, dimensional differences
also occur between persons of different occupations even in a single hetero-
geneous population. It is most commonly thought that selective pressures
of a social, educational or physical nature act to produce the effect.
The third source of human variability which is here termed "secular"
concerns changes which occur from generation to generation. Though not well
understood this factor is of some importance in systems design. The lengthy
lead time required for the production of modern spacecraft and systems is
such that the crew members who may eventually use them are often not even
of adult age when the design specifications are fixed. It is of more than
casual interest, therefore, to estimate what the physical size and propor-
tions of a particular design population will be at a given point in the fu-
ture.
II-2
WHITE
BLACK
ORIENTAL
Figure 1. Body size comparisons of three principal
racial groups: males and females.
II-3
Following a brief discussion of a few causes of size and shape varia-
bility of the individual we will offer in this chapter selected anthropome-
tric data to guide the designer in statistically characterizing the variabil-
ity of groups or populations as described above. Sections on the effects of
aging, nutrition, right side-left side asymmetry, and transient changes in
body size including day-to-day variations, the effect of posture and
movement, and the effect of protective garments, will constitute the
description of pertinent intra-individual variability. The effects of zero-g
on body size, while noted in this chapter, have been covered in some detail
in Chapter I. Variations between the sexes and among persons of different
nationalities, racial groups and occupations will be discussed in sections on
inter-individual variations. The concluding portions of this chapter will
contain a discussion of secular changes recorded in the past century and
suggest methods of predicting the size of astronauts and scientists a decade
from now.
It should be assumed in all data presented that, unless otherwise noted
we are dealing with adults for whom growth is complete. Obvious examples
of extremes in size such as are found in Pygmy or Watusi populations have
been ignored as have been pathogenetic examples of size extremes such as
dwarfism or giantism. The data presented in this chapter represent "healthy"
adults whose size variability (individually and in populations) reflect only
the effects of "normal" genetic and environmental impact.
As we have attempted to do throughout this volume, an effort has been
made to limit anthropometric data, wherever possible, to population surveys
in which comparable measurement techniques and body landmarks were used.
Obviously errors introduced by inter-anthropometrist differences cannot
be altogether avoided and are endemic whenever comparative data presentations
are made. Often, data presented in this chapter represents only selected
dimensions for which more complete data from the same anthropometric survey
is presented in more complete form elsewhere in the text.
Causes of Human Size Varability
No two individuals of a sexually reproducing species are exactly
alike." The statistical potential for individuality, in fact, verges on the
incredible. Based on the weight of nucleotide pairs, Muller, the Nobel Prize
winning geneticist, has estimated that there are 10 > *♦" Oj "" o , o o o possible
combinations in the mass of DNA equivalent to that contained in the 46 human
chromosomes (Dobzhansky 1962). Muller' s staggering number would have to
be further increased by unknown factors based on the number of possible
combinations of environmental conditions which exert an influence on an indi-
vidual's phenotypic expression.
*Monozygotic or identical twins have the same genotype, but somatic muta-
tions, the environment, etc., will act to produce dissimilarities in adults.
II-4
At conception, the genetic endowment composes the individual's genotype
which directs the formulation of the distinctly human, distinctly individual-
ized proteins from which a given person's cells are built. Instructions guide
cellular differentiation into special organ systems, the size, if not the
shape, of component organs and blends everything together into a distinctly
human and a distinctly individual morphology. The resultant expression of
genotype is called the phenotype, which includes those physical characteris-
tics that can be observed, described or measured by the human biologist.
There is little direct evidence to describe the genetic impact upon
the development of body dimensions. The inheritance of a number of body
deforming syndromes (e.g., Marfan' s syndrome, Laurence-Moon-Biedl syndrome)
appear to be controlled by single genes; most continuously quantitative
dimensional traits, on the other hand, are considered to be polygenic. With a
number of genes acting as a "system," the resultant phenotypic expression
becomes as varied as the number of mathematically possible combinations. The
situation is made more complex by the potential for pleiotrophic effects
(multiple effects of a single gene), mutations and both internal and external
environmental effects.
Whether or not physical characteristics of differing humans, racial
or otherwise, are adaptive or non-adaptive has not been completely settled
by physical anthropologists. It is clear, however, that certain selected
phenotypic characteristics find higher incidence in given environments. For
example, the natural occurrence of black skin in tropical areas of the globe
cannot be refuted.
Such factors as (1) climate, including temperature, amount of sunlight,
and humidity, (2) altitude, (3) topography, and (4) soil type have been shown
to be correlated with various physical traits. Of the metero logical criter-
ia, temperature is perhaps the factor most frequently related to types of
people. Simply stated, man tends toward linearity in warmer climates and to
be more spheric in colder climates. Related to this phenomenon are the so
called rules of Bergman (warmer climates=smaller body size) and Allen (body
protrusions and/or extremities shorter=colder climate). Both rules are
interpreted to be adaptations to body heat exchange needs of a homeotherm. A
compilation of stature-weight ratios for inhabitants of different parts of
world is given in Table 1. Although not wholly consistent, the data tend to
show a lower stature - weight ratio in cold areas of the world and a higher
ratio in those that are hot.
Some other relationships between environment and various human traits
which have been described include:
(1) lighter skin at higher altitudes.
(2) stockier build at higher altitudes, more linear at low.
(3) greater incidence of epicanthic fold at altitude.
(4) calf size greater in mountains than flat areas.
(5) low nasal index in cold-dry environments.
(6) high nasal index in hot-humid environments.
(7) basal metabolic rate increases as mean annual temperature
decreases.
II-5
TABLE 1
STATURE, WEIGHT, AND STATURE: WEIGHT RATIO AMONG INHABITANTS
OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD (D0BZHA1>)SKY, 1962, AFTER BLACK)-
MEAN
VALUE
Population
Stature
Wei
^ht
Ratio
White
Finland
171.0
(67.3)
70.0
(154.4)
2.44
United States (Army)
173.9
(68.5)
70.2
(154.8)
2.48
Iceland
173.6
(68.4)
68.1
(150.2)
2.55
France
172.5
(67.9)
67.0
(147.7)
2.57
England
166.3
(65.5)
64.5
(142.2)
2.58
Sicily
169.1
(66.6)
65.0
(143.3)
2.60
Morocco
168.9
(66.5)
63.8
(140.7)
2.65
Scotland
170.4
(67.1)
61.8
(136.3)
2.76
Tunisia
173.4
(68.3)
62.3
(137.4)
2.78
Berbers
169.8
(66.9)
59.5
(131.2)
2.85
Mahratta (India)
163.8
(64.5)
55.7
(122.8)
2.94
Bengal (India)
165.8
(65.3)
52.7
(116.2)
3.15
Black
Yambasa
169.0
(66.5)
62.0
(136.7)
2.73
Kirdi
166.5
(65.6)
57.3
(126.4)
2.90
Baya
163.0
(64.2)
53.9
(118.9)
3.02
Batutsi
176.0
(69.3)
57.0
(125.7)
3.09
Kikuyu
164.5
(64.8)
51.9
(114.4)
3.17
Pygmies
142.2
(56.0)
39.9
(88.0)
3.56
Efe
143.8
(56.6)
39.8
(87.8)
3.61
Bushmen
155.8
(61.3)
40.4
(89.1)
3.86
Oriental
Kazakh (Turkestan)
163.1
(64.2)
69.7
(153.7)
2.34
Eskimo
161.2
(63.5)
62.9
(138.7)
2.56
North China
168.0
(66.1)
61.0
(134.5)
2.75
Korea
161.1
(63.4)
55.5
(122.4)
2.90
Central China
163.0
(64.2)
54.7
(120.6)
2.98
Japan
160.9
(63.4)
53.0
(116.9)
3.04
Sundanese
159.8
(62.9)
51.9
(114.4)
3.08
Annamites
158.7
(62.5)
51.3
(113.1)
3.09
Hong Kong
166.2
(65.4)
52.2
(115.1)
3.18
"'•Data given in centimeters and kilograms with inches and pounds
in parentheses.
II-6
Presented in the following sections are data which will alert the NASA
engineer to the nature, extent and magnitude of human body size variability
which will confront him in dealing with design problems for the astronauts
of today and tomorrow and help him to solve some of the problems of designing
for a range of users as potentially diverse as Japanese women and Scandina-
vian men. For a more complete presentation of specific dimensions for many
populations the reader is referred to Volume II of this data book.
Intra-individual Variations in Size
The Effect of Aging
A number of physical and physiological changes occur in the adult body
between the ages of 20 and 60 years as a result of the aging process. This
phenomena has been recorded by Hooton and Dupertuis (1951) and a number of
others. Among the changes of importance to the design engineer are the
following:
(1) Stature increases up to the age of 25 and decreases after the
age of 30 at a progressively increasing rate each decade.
(2) Body weight increases through 60 years (with the greatest increase
among those between 30 and 40), then may decrease below the 30-
year-old level.
(3) Chest circumference tends to increase at least through 60 years.
(4) Abdominal circumference tends to increase at least through 60
years.
(5) Strength decreases.
Certainly there are many additional changes that could be listed (i.e.,
body compositional changes such as an increasing percentage of body fat with
a tendency to shift to the central body); however, many are not well docu-
mented by longitudinal studies and are of limited importance in engineering
anthropometry. A summary of the average change for certain variables studied
over 10 years for each decade between 20 and 60 years of age is given in
Table 2.
TABLE 2
AVERAGE BODY CHANGES WHICH OCCUR WITH AGING
BASED ON GSELL (1967)-
Age
in years
Body Length
Body Weight
Chest Circ.
(minimum)
Abdominal
Circ.
20-30
+ till age 25
— - —
+6.8 (2.7)
+5.4 (2.1)
30-40
- 0.6 (0.2)
+3.4 (7.5)
+2.4 (0.9)
+4.6 (1.8)
40-50
- 1.4 (0.6)
+2.5 (5.5)
+1.7 (0.7)
+3.2 (1.3)
50-60
- 1.7 (0.7)
+2.1 (4.6)
•Data given in kilograms and centimeters with pounds and inches in paren-
theses.
II-7
Perhaps more to the point for NASA designers are the differences which
are found when 20-30 year-old persons are compared to 30-40 year-olds in
the same population. One such study on men was reported by Fry and Churchill
(1956). The authors analyzed dimensional differences for 132 measurements
on pilots under 30 years old and over 30 years old as subgroups of the 1950
Air Force survey. A selected group of 17 measurements which had mean differ-
ences greater than 1 mm. (.04 in.) was analyzed to see what differ-
ences existed between the older and younger pilots at the 5th, 25th, 75th
and 95th percentiles. Results are shown in Table 3. The majority of the mea-
surements selected are clearance dimensions in which small variations may
have marked effects on the design of personal equipment and clothing. The
percentile values demonstrate that in addition to noting the differences
in the mean values, it is also important to know where and to what extent
the "large" and "small" men change with age.
The Effect of Nutrition
After growth is complete, nutrition may continue to play a role in
body size. Overeating and starvation represent nutritional extremes which
clearly affect a person's size. Slight dietary excesses and deficiencies
probably occur from time to time in every adult lifetime. How much
fluctuations in dietary substance such as trace elements and the like affect
body size as one ages is unknown. However, generalized overeating over a
period of time usually results in obesity. The obesity development associated
with middle age in industrialized nations is well known and does not require
documentation here. Experimentally controlled studies in obesity furnishing
dimensional changes associated with a known diet are rare. In one study (Sims
et al. 1968) nine subjects increased body weight by an average of 24.87o over
a 300-day test period. These investigators found from 0.4 mm (.016 in.)
(calf) to 3.0 mm (.12 in.) (lower abdomen) increase in body radii for each
percent increase in body fat.
Perhaps the most outstanding illustration of the effect of starvation
on body size is found in a study by Ivanovsky(1923) , who reported dimensional
changes occurring in over 2,000 Russian adults during a two-year famine
following World War I. Of the measurements reported, the most outstanding
change occurred in stature, with average decreases of 4.7 cm (1.9 in.) and
3.8 cm (1.5 in.) in the men and women respectively. So far as can be deter-
mined, these rather significant losses cannot be attributed to technique,
since near original statures were regained within six months following
restoration of normal diet. The decrement in stature in starvation was
thought to be principally due to vertebral shrinkage.
In a controlled short-term study of semi-starvation, Brozek et al .
(1957) reported girth decrements up to 9.57. over a 24-day period. Data
reflecting the changes in circumference measured in the study are shown in
Table 4. Mean weight loss in the Brozek group was 7.58 kg. (16.7 lbs.). The
importance of dimensional change from nutritional excesses or deficiencies
II-8
TABLE 3
DIMENSIONAL DIFFERENCES AT SEVERAL PERCENTILE LEVELS BETWEEN USAF PILOTS
AGED 20-30 YEARS AND USAF PILOTS AGED 30-4CH- YEARS,
BASED ON FRY AND CHURCHILL, 1956^
Older Pilots Minus Younger Pilots^
Dimension 57. 257. 507. 757. 957.
Weight
Stature
Nipple height
Crotch height
Buttock-knee length
Waist circ.
Chest circ.
Buttock circ. (sitting)
Buttock circ. (standing)
Waist breadth
Chest breadth
Hip breadth (sitting)
Elbow-elbow breadth
Knee-knee breadth
Shoulder breadth
Waist depth
Chest depth
Data given in kilograms and centimeters with pounds and inches in parentheses.
Negative values (-) indicate younger group is larger.
1.5
(3.2)
1.5
(3.2)
2.0
(4.4)*
1.7
(3.8)*
1.2
(2.6)
0.3
(0.1)
-0.5
(-0.2)
-0.5
(-0.2)
0.3
(0.1)
1.8
(0.7)
-0.5
(-0.2)
-0.3
(-0.1)
-0.5
(-0.2)
0.0
(0.0)
1.5
(0.6)
-1.8
(-0.7)**
-1.0
(-0,4)**
-0.3
(-0.1)
0.5
(0.2)
0.8
(0.3)
0.0
(0.0)
0.0
(0.0)
-0.3
(-0.1)
0.3
(0.1)
0.8
(0.3)
2.3
(0.9)*
2.5
(1.0)**
2.8
(1.1)**
2.8
(1.1)**
2.3
(0.9)
1.5
(0.6)*
1.5
(0.6)**
1.8
(0.7)**
2.3
(0.9)**
2.3
(0.9)
2.5
(1.0)**
1.8
(0.7)*-*
1.8
(0.7)*-*
1.3
(0.5)*
1.8
(0.7)
2.0
(0.8)**
1.5
(0.6)**
1.0
(0.4)*
0.8
(0.3)
-0.3
(-0.1)
1.0
(0.4)**
0.5
(0.2)*
0.5
(0.2)**
0.5
(0.2)*
0.8
(0.3)
0.0
(0.0)
0.3
(0.1)
0.5
(0.2)**
0.3
(0.1)
0.5
(0.2)
0.5
(0.2)
0.5
(0.2)**
0.3
(0.1)
0.3
(0.1)
0.3
(0.1)
1.3
(0.5)**
1.8
(0.7)*-*
1.5
(0.6)**
1.3
(0.5)**
1.8
(0.7)
0.0
(0.0)
0.0
(0.0)
0.0
(0.0)
0.3
(O.D*
0.0
(0.0)
0.0
(0.0)
0.3
(0.1)
0.3
(0.1)
0.5
(0.2)**
0.3
(0.1)
0.8
(0.3)**
0.8
(0.3)**
0.8
(0.3)**
0.8
(0.3)*-*
1.0
(0.4)
0.3
(0.3)**
0.8
(0.3)**
0.5
(0.2)**
0.8
(0.3)*-*
0.5
(0.2)
= Difference significant at 57. level ("Student's" t test)
= Difference significant at 17. level ("Student's" t test)
II-9
TABLE 4
CHANGE IN BODY GIRTHS OF YOUNG MEN WITH SEMI -STARVATION
BASED ON BROZEK ET AL. 1957"
Body Part Circ. at S.D. Change after 24 days: °L Change
Intake=1010 kcal/day
Upper Arm 28.5 ±2.5 - 2.7 cm 9.5%
(1.1)
Chest 92.5 + 7.9 - 4.4 4.8
(1.7)
Circ. at
Start
S.D.
28.5
(11.2)
+ 2.5
(± 1)
92.5
(36.4)
+ 7.9
(± 3.1)
80.3
(31.6)
+ 7.4
(± 2.9)
47.4
(18.7)
+ 3.4
(± 1.3)
38.3
(15.1)
+ 2.8
(+ 1.1)
Abdomen 80.3 + 7.4 - 7.1 8.8
(2.8)
Thigh 47.4 + 3.4 - 4.0 8.4
(1.6)
Calf 38.3 + 2.8 - 2.4 6.3
(0.9)
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
for the designer is perhaps the fact that significant size changes can occur
over a rather brief period of time although, unfortunately, such changes
are highly individual.
Right Side-Left Side Asymmetry
People tend to believe that one side of their bodies is larger or
longer than the other. Whether right side-left side asymmetry is real or
imagined and therefore of any concern to the human engineer is the question.
Laubach and McConville (1967) reported data for 21 paired measurements ob-
tained from 42 to 117 young male subjects. Their data is summarized in Table
5. In 12 measurements the mean difference is less than one mm, well within
the measurement error range. The authors question whether the statistically
significant differences obtained in eight of the 21 measurements are of
any practical significance.
A somewhat different study of right- left size variation was reported
by Peters (1969), who measured some relaxed and erect, right and left side
heights on 1166 women (German). A summary of this data is given in Table
6. Clearly in terras of work space (especially during seated desk vrork) the
slumped versus erect differences are, on the whole, greater than the right-
left differences.
11-10
(n(J<Nr-j<NtN000O0<N000'^00O O O
uz '.^^^'-'^'-'^
-~- OS
H U
a a
z
o
M
z
u
s
o o
oo
o
00
r» r** oo M
n 00 <*i o
O
O
8a>
CM CM rsl
CM CM ^^ in
^-^
^
<N
>^^
^
00
00
nO
o
(—1
rg
»n
r*
.— t
m
00
r*
-*
r^
o^
<n
<>
^^
o
m
tn
00
00
■— 1
^
CVJ
O
^
t— 1
in
■J-
00
%o
vO
o
00
u-»
IN
n
o
r-
m
C*J
<n
>.^
•— (
,^
■— 1
^^
OJ
t— 1
<— t
s.^
m
CN
>«>'
V-'
•-4
•-4
>^-'
-^
^-'
s^
a
(ii|
OS
OS
2 S
00 <-« ^
<t *n ^o
CM CM ri
»n \0
-3-
CN 00 en
•n ^ ^
m CM •-•
NO
CM
(-S
CN
O
•—1
•-I
m
-I
r^
00
/-s
m
cn
<t
o>
CM
m
s
o
o
o
»A>
cn
r*
o
o^
»n
<n
r-
^4
o>
-3-
CM
r-
m
en
CM
•— (
en
^^
-^
f— 1
^^
<-^
Csj
—
*-*
o
■*
*"
^^
""
^^
""^
^^
**^
^*^
^"^
'**'
'"■^
Ul
Of
1/
(A
^o
(JN
^
CM
-a-
m
CN
o
oo
CM
r-
o
m
a^
o
r*
on
m
on
r^
0)
•o
nD
u-1
m
flO
m
in
n
rt
OS
^
OS
m
i-t
m
00
en
o
m
en
<y
X
V
CM
CM
CM
^H
>3-
CM
CN
^^
m
-t
rg
Csl
^^
^^
^-«
*
*
*
*
c
•»^
M
(O
10
4J
a
■c
^—N
*^N
^-^
*-^
^^
^^
y-s
/-v
^^
^
^
t^\
/^
^m^
^1^
^,«^
IK
m
o
fO
m
00
vO
CN
3
Csj
Csj
OS
in
oo
cn
<f
r*
«o
vO
>t
■—1
•H
o
<!•
^
in
r-
»-<
00
»n
~I
so
OS
<r
c^
•-4
o
m
m
nn
ON
o:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•-^
1—1
CM
o
o
^-<
in
-»
00
>o
sO
o
00
m
CM
en
o
r^
en
CN
en
(U
c
^
f— 1
^
N-'
CM
N— '
^
^
•^
in
s— '
m
rsl
s— /
.—1
■>.— '
■s
c
£
vO
1—1
vO
<r
CM
00
•— (
00
^^
r^
OS
so
f^
OS
vO
>t
sO
t— t
fTv
in
tn
CN
<r
in
■J
in
sD
<r
CM
r-
<J
<I
in
CN
<t
f— t
o
4J
2
oo
.— i
vO
>o
tn
CO
sO
CsJ
en
CM
Csj
OO
rl
r^
CN
o
CM
t— 1
OS
m
~»
•-»
X
on
CN
4J
f— •
tn
B
c
•S.
c
00
01
00
Q)
r
u
f)
0)
•o
U
(U
Q)
0)
ni
s
OJ
c
0)
(M
<4-J
<u
4J
x
X
Q)
u
<u
u
X
c
^^
^^
0)
U
c
3
3
o
c
00
•
c
F-4
a>
0)
u
u
c
u
•H
u
X
^
M
u
OJ
u
4J
w
u
u
•n
.—4
jZ
t
Q)
•H
f-t
u
a
X
x;
'M
4J
JZ
01
>^
*
*
3
o
u
(U
VM
00
<J
X
00
u
-n
•
b
g
•H
o
00
4J
tH
(A
r.
>
D
JZ
J=
fc
3
<u
■H
JZ
•H
n
QJ
o
n
4J
0)
•T3
•H
00
00
3
U
j:
h
00
01
00
r;
4J
1^
u
X)
V4
tg
00
•
•H
•H
•H
u
ki
<u
•H
r;
•H
(Q
on
(0
^
■H
J^
x;
l-l
•H
f— I
4J
X
0)
c
c
C
c
0)
^
b
4J
■u
•^
U
n
c
4J
(U
X
o
o
1— 1
0)
V4
tn
^
AJ
u
•^
<g
1-(
•H
3
^
3
(Q
a
4J
l-l
^
01
fc
j:
^
o
01
u
F
1
l-t
V4
Q
E
(U
<u
<u
IM
o
u
01
•H
»-l
>,
o
•
-n
T)
OJ
3
■K
iq
f-l
Q.
u
f— 1
j<:
ki
e
3
ja
j«;
x:
u
•o
c
c
F
E
o
Q.
o
m
c
u
<)
•H
r:
n,
o
nl
(0
m
n
0)
>l
<
m
M
u*
3
=>
J
o
<
<
H
►J
H
<
w
<
PS
X
X
X
u*
II-U
TABLE 6
RIGHT SIDE-LEFT SIDE DIMENSIONAL DIFFERENCES IN WOMEN IN ERECT AND RELAXED POSTURES
(BASED ON PETERS 1969)*
Dlff
. between
Dlff
. between
Measurement
Mean
S.
.D.
erect & relax
right & left
Stature
(erect)
(relax)
163. A
163.2
(64.33)
(64.25)
6.9
4.6
(2.7)
(1.8)
0.2
(.08)
Acromial
ht.
(erect-R)
(erect-L)
(relax-R)
(relax-L)
132.1
132.4
131.3
131.6
(52.01)
(52.13)
(51.69)
(51.81)
5.0
3.9
5.1
4.5
(2.0)
(1.5)
(2.0)
(1.8)
0.8
0.8
(.3)
(.3)
0.3
0.3
(.1)
(.1)
Elbow ht.
(erect-R)
(erect-L)
(relax-R)
(relax-L)
100.1
99.2
99.4
99.2
(39.41)
(39.06)
(39.13)
(39.06)
4.6
5.1
3.4
4.2
(1.8)
(2.0)
(1.3)
(1.7)
0.7
0.0
(.3)
0.9
0.2
(.4)
(.08)
Sitting
ht.
(erect)
(relax)
83.7
82.9
(32.95)
(32.64)
2.6
2.2
(1.0)
(0.9)
0.8
(.3)
Eye ht.
sitting
(erect)
(relax)
74.2
73.1
(29.21)
(28.78)
3.7
3.3
(1.5)
(1.3)
1.1
(.4)
Acromial
ht.
sitting
(erect-R)
(erect-L)
(relax-R)
(relax-L)
52.7
52.9
51.7
51.8
(20.75)
(20.83)
(20.35)
(20.39)
2.7
1.4
2.3
2.8
(1.1)
(0.6)
(0.9)
(1.1)
1.0
1.1
(.4)
(.4)
0.2
0.1
(.08)
(.04)
Elbow
rest ht.
(erect-R)
(erect-L)
(relax-R)
(relax-L)
20.3
20.6
19.3
19.6
( 7.99)
( 8.11)
( 7.60)
( 7.72)
2.3
2.2
2.5
2.4
(0.9)
(0.9)
(1.0)
(0.9)
1.0
1.0
(.4)
(.4)
0.3
0.3
(.1)
(.1)
Thigh
dlam.
sitting
(R)
(L)
14.1
14.0
( 5.55)
( 5.51)
1.4
1.3
(0.6)
(0.5)
0.1
(.04)
Thigh ht.
sitting
(R)
(L)
50.7
51.3
(19.96)
(20.20)
3.4
3.1
(1.3)
(1.2)
0.6
(.2)
Knee ht.
sitting
(R)
(L)
39.3
39.6
(15.47)
(15.59)
2.3
2.3
(0.9)
(0.9)
0.3
(.1)
*Data given In centimeters with inches in parentheses.
11-12
Causes of Transient Body Size Change
While it is common knowledge that such long-terra factors as aging,
diet and disease have an effect on body size, it is much less well known
that body dimensions fluctuate each day and that, wherever possible in the
design of clothing and equipment, allowances for such changes should be
made.
Many studies of day-to-day fluctuations in body weight have been
conducted (Garrow, 1974; Khosla and Billewicz, 1964). Most such studies
indicate that it is normal for weight to vary between 0.5 kg. (1.1 lb.) and
1.0 kg. (2.2 lb.) per day. This probably is largely the result of changes in
total body water content during the day.
Decreases in stature occur during the course of a day as a result
of compression of the fibrocartilaginous intervertebral disks and increased
curvature of the spine as gravity and load-carrying strain the system. Loss
in stature ranges from three to five cm. (1.2 to 2 inches) according to
a number of investigators (Munipov and Zinchencko, 1970; DePuky, 1935; Ivan-
ovsky, 1923) depending on the amount of standing, walking, or carrying which
is done. In one study (Ivanovsky, 1923) , stevedores were found to decrease
5 cm. ( 2 in.) by the end of the day. It is suggested that the best time
to measure stature is at the beginning of the day, if "maximum" stature is
critical to the problem at hand.
Normally stature, eye height and sitting height are greatly affected
by posture. For example, the erect versus "slumped" difference may range
from 2 cm. (.75 in.) to 4.5 cm. (1.75 inches) for stature and sitting height
respectively (Heitzberg, 1972). Anthropometrists conducting a survey of
Women's Air Force personnel in 1968 recorded a difference of 1.3 cm. (.51
inches) between erect and relaxed sitting height. An average difference
of 0.4 cm. (.15 in.) was found between two erect posture techniques (i.e.,
the British Morant method mean stature is greater than the U.S. method) when
measurements were made of 2,000 RAF aircrewmen (Bolton et al. 1973). The
higher figures are thought to be due to the straightening of the spine and
tilting of the head which occurs when the subject is instructed to stretch to
full height against a wall as he is in the Morant method. Damon (1964) found
a stature difference ranging from .5 cm. (0.2 inches) to 2.0 cm. (0.8 inches)
between subjects measured free standing versus those stretched against a
wall. As expected, those measured against the wall were "taller." Head
tilting (above the Frankfort plane) when subjects were backed against the
wall added an average of 0.2 cm. (.08 inches) to the measurement.
All of the foregoing indicates the importance of controlled measurement
conditions and suggests that users of such data should check, when possible,
to determine by what means and under what conditions the measurements were
made.
Obviously as a person moves within an imaginary three-dimensional
static envelope which encompasses all possible body positions, size-related
changes are constantly occurring. Considering that the spheroid envelope
11-13
itself moves through space as the individual walks, runs, jumps, climbs
and reaches, a truly dynamic analysis of body size changes would be extremely
complex. There are, however, a number of dimensional changes which result
from movement but which may be treated as static size changes when only
the maximum "end of the range of change" is considered for design purposes.
The effect of erect or slumped posture and of different techniques
on stature and sitting height measurements have already been mentioned.
Related to these effects is the fact that standing height is less than prone
or supine body length. Alexander and Clauser (1965) found supine length
to average 2.59 cm (1 inch) more than stature. Buttock breadth and abdominal
depth are examples of dimensions that increase from standing to sitting
configurations of the body (Damon, Stoudt and McFar land, 1966). The chest,
of course, moves and changes dimensions with each respiration. To some extent
the abdomen will also change in girth during breathing. Although quite vari-
able between individuals, especially between men and women, the abdominal
wall may traverse a 2-3 cm (.79 to 1.2 inch) anterior-posterior distance
with maximum breathing (Agostoni and Mead, 1964). Pregnancy, of course,
results in significant dimensional changes on the torso of women.
One of the better known dimensional changes associated with movement
is the increase in girth with flexion. What child has not been asked to
"make a muscle" by flexing the biceps? Perhaps for this reason both relaxed
and flexed biceps circumferences are frequently measured. A compilation of
flexed- relaxed bicep measurements for U.S. and European military personnel is
given in Table 7. The mean girth increase with flexion for the 11 male groups
surveyed is 2.4 cm (0.95 in.). The single female sample averaged 1.18 cm
(0.46 in.) increase, or approximately one half of the male value. The flexed-
relaxed circumferences of the elbow and forearm for the same populations are
also given in Table 7. The average of 18.87o increase in elbow circumference
demonstrates why tightly fitting clothing may restrict motion or blood flow
in the arm.
A dimensional change often overlooked is the increase or decrease
in longitudinal dimensions on the convex and concave surfaces of joints
during movement. Form fitting clothing, pressure suits, prosthetic devices,
or anything that must allow a good range of body mobility requires
consideration of these changes. Linear distance changes over the body surface
resulting from various joint movements were studied by Emanuel and Barter
(1957). A summary of the 49 measurements made on 30 subjects is given in
Table 8. Measurements were made using a flexible tape. Two arbitrary points
were marked on either side of a joint and distances between them measured,
first in a neutral position and then in specified flexed, abducted, retracted
or protruded positions. While there are definite and significant changes.
in bodily dimensions with joint movement, the authors found them to be
"fairly constant in magnitude" and repeatable. The amount of change is fairly
constant regardless of stature or weight of the person.
11-14
iU
en
IX
z
o
M
O
H
e2
^
3
^
cu
b,
o
Hi
z
S
z
>-
%
H
a
M
1
^
h
o
IX
u
H
O
Q
u
U
►J
><
bJ
<ri
1/)
fS
U
s
z
Ul
z
ca
CiJ
&
g
g
u
CJ
m
b:
M
( )
<
^
3
t/i
a
u
.J
n
U4
Z
u
ca
g
§
[b
u.
t/i
M
a<
Q
u
o
^S
•
in
o
•
00
•
•
CM
•
NO
•
NO
u
1
en
GO
o
u-l
00
r^
f^
CM
•
NO
vO
•
cn 00
r* vo
* •
<
f-l
-•^
(-H
^-'
-
s^
r-j
-^
1—1
^-^
^^
v-^
F-i
s—-
t— • s.^
M
IX
^^
00
CM
o
•
•
CM
s
o
00
■J
•
CM
-J
CM
•
CM
•
r-
CM
•
o
•— *
^0
00
•
CNJ
in
•
o
*-<
o
<— *
CM
GO
CM
•
o
a*
•
NO
CM
CM
NO
•
o
O "^
• •
r- o
CM r-<
•
CM
•
CM
00
CO
•
00
•
CO
00
•
-a-
in
•
1-*
en
•
CO
CM
•
.—1
CM
o
«
00
CO
o
«
t— 4
•
GO
00
•
1-1
en en
o ^
• •
a^ ,-1
U
i
M «
CM -H CM
00
00
^^ CM^^ CM^^ CMt— t CM
I lO -J-
lis
c^
kl >0 00
^ en
.-• 00
•-< CM
00
o
»n
r^
nO
•
00
00
NO
GO
CM
•— *
•—1
)-^
/-s
.^-N
y-s
^-v
r^
^
00
-a-
cn
o
CM
^ c^
NO
00
NO
00
en
r-
a>
1** CM
^
«— 1
^
^4
<t
^^
>3-
f^
>^^
Nm^
>-•
s-^
/-S
•-S
y-*.
On <-•
NO
CM
^-t
NO
NO
GO
ON
ON
CM
en
O
00
^-1
<r
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
nO o
m
o
m
CT*
m
o
nO
O
CM »-t
CM
CM
CM
CM
^-^
o
o
<r o
CM n
00 CM
ON >0
.-n <o
>o O
<}\ go
0» ON
^ 00
IX ?;2
O CM
cn ^
nO
I o^ r-
ON J-
OO '-<
<N tn
-- 00
c^
00 CN
u-i o
o
00
r^ ON
CM 00
CO NO
nO n£>
u
a
o.
IX
IX
s
^H CO
NO O
IX
c
o
a
3
•O
w
CO
c
o
O CM
cn -J
r- o
CM <-l
r~ O
CM —t
OO -J
CM —I
'^^ <n ^
<r ON
r~ 00
m CM
O CM
p- u-l
rsi <JN
CM NO
m CM
m o
r^ CM
r^ r-
O- NO
NO O
in cjN
ON ^
CM CM
cn f-t
>*•
-- CM
en .-1
NO o
CM ^^
CM CM
O (M
cn f-t
ON -H
CM ^H
O CM
en .-•
c
o
•H
r-
4J
nO
(8
V
1
3
(b
a
•<
o
cn
a<
3
m
NO
<
cn
3
•<
o
IB
Z
>N
m
X 4J
<n 1-4
u e
3 >-'
H
>N
<0
« e
O
>N
l-l
ra E
Q
■K
00
C
n
■s
CiO
u
u
v
Ok
11-15
TABLE 8
LINEAR DISTANCE CHANGES OVER BODY JOINTS WITH MOVEMENT
(BASED ON EMANUEL AND BARTER, 1957)*
Measurement
Mean Difference
Standard Deviation
ELBOW
Flexion, Full
8.48
(3.34)
WRIST
Dorsal Surface
Volar Flexion
2.00
(0.80)
Dorslf lexlon
-0.27
(-0.106)
Volar Surface
Volar Flexion
-3.37
(-1.47)
Dorslflexlon
1.93
(0.76)
SHOULDER
Anterior
Suprastemale-Acromlon
Protrusion
-2.21
(-0.87)
Abduction, Horiz.
-1.22
(-0.48)
Sternum to Scye
Protrusion
-2.88
(-1.13)
Retraction
2.79
(1.09)
Abduction, Horlz.
2.46
(0.97)
Scye to Mid- arm
Protrusion
-0.84
(-0.33)
Retraction
1.83
(0.72)
Abduction, Horlz.
1.47
(0.58)
Posterior
Cervlcale to Acromion
Protrusion
-0.53
(-0.21)
Retraction
-2.57
(-1.01)
Abduction, Horlz.
-4.93
(-1.94)
Abduction, Overhead
-8.74
(-3.44)
Vertebra to Scye
Protrusion
-9.30
(-3.66)
Abduction, Horiz.
2.01
(0 .79)
Abduction, Overhead
5.77
(2.27)
Posterior Scye to Mid-Arm
Protrusion
4.78
(1.88)
Abduction, Horlz.
1.55
(0.61)
Abduction, Overhead
4.60
(1.81)
Lateral
Acromion to Mid-Arm
Protrusion
-3.18
(-1.25)
Retraction
-2.44
(-0.96)
Abduction, Horiz.
-3.71
(-1.46)
Abduction, Overhead
-5.72
(-2.25)
0.91
0.48
0.74
0.74
0.51
(0.36)
(0.19)
(0.29)
(0.29)
(0.20)
0.66
0.43
(0.26)
(0.17)
1.24
1.09
1.19
(0.49)
(0.43)
(0 .47)
1.32
0.51
0.97
(0.52)
(0 .20)
(0.38)
0.94
1.27
0.91
1.17
(0.37)
(0 .50)
(0.36)
(0 .46)
1.65
1.22
1.42
(0.65)
(0 .48)
(0.56)
0.97
0.76
0.94
(0.38)
(0 .30)
(0 .37)
0.86
0.64
0.53
0.91
(0 .34)
(0 .25)
(0.21)
(0 .36)
*Data given in centimeters with Inches in parentheses.
11-16
TABLES (continued)
Measurement
Mean Difference
Standard Devlatton
NECK
Anterior
Suprastemale to Menton
Posterior Flexion
Post«h:ior
Vertebra at Scye Level to Inion
Anterior Flexion
Lateral
Acromion to Mastoid Tip
Ri^t Flexion
Left Flexion
7.14
6.12
-5.05
3.02
HIP
Anterior
(Ant. Sup.
Spine Level to 3/4 Thigh)
rauMC
(Coccyx Tip to Cervlcale, Sitting)
Flexion, Full Anterior 10.11
(2.81)
(2.41)
(-1.99)
(1.19)
Hyper extension
1.32
(0.52)
Hanging, Sitting, 90°
-6.71
(-2.64)
Posterior
Flexion, Forced, Sitting
15.24
(6.00)
Hyperextension
-0.91
(0.36)
Hanging. Sitting, 90°
8.64
(3.40)
Lateral
Abduction
-3.12
(-1.23)
KNEE
Anterior
(3/4 Thigh to Mid-Calf)
Flexion, Forced
10.39
(4.09)
Flexion, 90°, Sitting
5.99
(2.36)
(3.98)
ANKLE
Anterior
(Mid-Calf Interphalangeal
Joint
I)
Dorsiflexion
-1.75
(0.69)
Plantar Flexion
3.58
(1.41)
Posterior
(Mid-Calf to Heel Line)
Dorsiflexion
0.51
(0.20)
Plantar Flexion
-3.45
(-1.36)
1.09
1.14
1.70
0.91
0.48
1.12
1.98
1.17
1.88
1.47
1.04
0.91
1.88
0.97
0.71
0.56
0.81
(0 .43)
(0 .45)
(0 .67)
(0 .36)
(0 .19)
(0 .44)
(0 .78)
(0 .46)
(0 .74)
(0 .58)
(0.41)
(0.36)
(0.74)
(0.38)
(0.28)
(0.22)
(0.32)
11-17
Effects of Protective Garments on Body Size
Basic anthropometric dimensions are normally given for the nude or
"shirt sleeved" conditions; however, in a number of situations personal
protective garments or equipment which must be worn may grossly alter the
effective size of the wearer. Not only may heavy winter clothing add over
9.1 kg. (20 lbs) to body weight, but it may also increase stature some 7
cm (2,8 in.) and will add up to 25 cm (10 in.) to other key dimensions.
In addition to simple linear dimension increases, such clothing may signifi-
cantly affect range of joint movement and thereby further complicate the
design layout of work spaces. Therefore, modifications in body size and
biomechanical characteristics of an individual should be given careful con-
sideration by the designer in situations where special encumbering gear
will be used.
The change in selected body dimensions for a variety of civilian clo-
thing, U.S. Army uniforms and U.S. Air Force flight assemblies is given
in Table 9. In a more recent study Alexander, Laubach and McConville (1976)
obtained data on the effect of full flight clothing on body size. The incre-
mental and percentage increases in five nude and suited body dimensions
critical to aircraft ejection envelopes are given in Figure 2. Investigators
also found that in order to maintain the eye reference point (the basic
design datum for cockpits) at a constant level, the seat reference point
would have to be lowered an average of 1.9 cm (.75 in.) when aircrew wear
maximum flight assemblies.
As if the dimensional increases caused by ordinary protective clothing
were not sufficient, even greater changes in dimensions are associated with
full pressure suits. Pressure suits generally are anthropomorphic gas-tight
bags, designed to protect a pilot or astronaut from the reduced atmospheric
pressure of high altitudes or the vacuum of space. When pressure suits are
inflated to operational pressure (usually about 1/3 atmosphere), they grow
in size and become stiff, often making motion difficult. The effect of one
type of pressure suit, both uninflated and inflated, on 33 body dimensions,
was reported by Clauser and Hertzberg in 1964. Results can be seen in Table
10. Although many girths are increased significantly, the most outstanding
increase is in knee-to-knee breadth. In a later study of a more advanced Air
Force pressure suit (Alexander, et al . 1969) the greatest dimensional change
was again found to be in knee-to-knee breadth. The mean incremental
(uninflated to inflated) and percentage change in six dimensions when this
pressure suit is worn is shown in Figure 3. As with the flight clothing, the
legs are more dimensionally affected than are the arms.
During EVA (extra-vehicular activity) the astronaut must wear a
pressure suit which may include a portable life support system (PLSS). (The
total assembly has been termed by NASA an Extra-Vehicular Mobility Unit or
EMU.) A number of functional envelope dimensions required for the fully
suited 5th and 95th percentile astronaut carrying the PLSS and Backup Oxygen
Supply (OPS) are given in Figure 4. The recommended design dimensions for
access corridors, hatches and direction change for the suited astronaut*
(Apollo EMU) are shown in Figure 5.
*Prelimlnary Design Requirements for Shuttle EVA/IVA Orbiter Support. NASA
Internal Note MSC-EC-R-71-10, 1971.
11-18
CRIG'N-' ' r . •
QZ POOR QUALxT^
TABLE 9
INCREASE IN DIMENSIONS FROM CLOTHING (BASED ON CLAUSER AND HERTZBERG, 1964)-
CtvllLn
Anav
Man Woman
Straat Straat
Clothlnt Clothlnt
Unlfom
Fall
Uniform
Wlntar
Unlfom
Ulntar
Combat
Full
Flight
Gaar
Light
Flight
Assaably
Hlacar
Flight
AaaamblT
Halght
12.70 8.90
(5.00) (3.50)
23.88
(9.40)
29.98
(11.80)
47.24
(18.60)
58.17
(22.90)
(20.00)
Statura
2.5<> 1.27>7.«0
(1.00) (.5-3.0)
6.60
(2.60)
6.73
(2.65)
6.73
(2.65)
6.99
(2.75)
-3.08
(-2.00)
8.38
(3.30)
4.83
(1.90)
Abdsaan
dapth
2.39
(.94)
3.0
(1.18)
4.95
(1.95)
6.45
(2.54)
12.70
(5.00)
3.56
(1.40)
Aim raach
antarlor
.10
(.04)
.20
(.08)
.51
(.20)
.94
(.37)
1.02
(.40)
Buttock-knaa
langth
.51
(.20)
.76
(.30)
1.37
(.54)
1.78
(.70)
3.08
(2.00)
1.27
(.30)
Chait braadth
6.35
(2.30)
1.52
(.60)
Chalt dapth
1.04
(.41)
2.44
(.96)
4.57
(1.80)
3.91
(1.54)
11.43
(4.50)
2.03
(.80)
3.56
(1.40)
Elbow braadth
1.42
(.56)
2.64
(1.04)
4.67
(1.84)
5.38
(2.12)
27.94
(11.00)
11.18
(4.40)
Eya laval ht.
•Ittint
.10
(.04)
.20
(.08)
.41
(.16)
.56
(.22)
1.02
(.40)
Foot braadth
.80
(.30)
.51
(.20)
.51
(.20)
.51
(.20)
.51
(.20)
3.05
(1.20)
Foot langth
3.05
(1.20)
4.06
(1.60)
4.06
(1.60)
4.06
(1.60)
4.06
(1.60)
6.86
(2.70)
Hand braadth
.76
(.30)
1.02
(.40)
Hand lan(th
.38
(.15)
.76
(.»)
Haad braadth
7.11
(2.80)
7.11
(2.80)
7.11
(2.80)
7.11
(2.80)
1.02
(.40)
Haad langth
8.90
(3.50)
8.90
(3.30)
8.90
(3.50)
8.90
(3.50)
1.02
(.40)
Haad halght
3.43
(1.35)
3.43
(1.35)
3.43
(1.35)
3.68
(1.45)
.51
(.20)
Hip braadth
1.42
(.56)
1.93
(.76)
2.74
(1.08)
3.56
(1.40)
3.30
(1.30)
Hip braadth
•Ittlng
1.42
(.56)
1.93
(.76)
2.74
(1.08)
3.56
(1.40)
13.97
(5.50)
7.37
(2.90)
4.32
(1.70)
Knaa braadth
1.22
(.48)
1.22
(.48)
1.83
(.72)
4.27
(1.68)
2.41
(9.50)
6.35
(2.50)
Knaa halght
attting
3.35
(1.32)
3.35
(1.32)
3.66
(1-44)
3.66
(1.44)
4.37
(1.80)
Shouldar
braadth
.61
(.24)
2.24
(.88)
3.86
(1.52)
2.95
(1.16)
15.24
(6.00)
1.02
(.40)
3.30
(1.30)
Shouldar-albo»
langth
.36
(.14)
1.27
(.50)
2.39
(.94)
1.37
(.62)
.76
(.30)
Shouldar ht.
sitting
.41
(.16)
1.47
(.58)
2.34
(.92)
2.0]
(.80)
1.52
(.60)
Sitting ht.
3.5?
(i.:v)
3.63
(1.43)
4.09
(1.61)
4.24
(1.67)
5.33
(2.10)
1.52
(.«)
*Data givan in canClaMtara with inchaa in paranthaaaa-
Civilians, men: underwear, shirt » trousers, tie , socks, shoes*
Civilians, women: underwear, dress, or blouse or sweater and skirt, shoes.
Army, surrmer uniform: underwear, khakis or O.D.'s or fatigues, socks, shoes, helmet and liner.
Anny, fall uniform: underwear, fatigues, field jacket, socks, shoes, helmet and liner.
Aniiy, winter uniform: underwear, fatigues, field jacket, overcoat, socks, shoes, helmet and liner.
Army, winter combat: underwear, fatigues, combat suit, overcoat, socks, shoes, gloves, wool cap, helmet and liner.
Air Force, full flight gear: T-l partial pressure suit, inflated; ventilation suit, deflated, MD- 1 anti-exposure
suit and MD-3A liner, long cotton underwear*
Air Force, light flight assembly: T-5 partial pressure suit, uninflated; K-l pressure helmet and boots.
Atr Force, winter flight assembly: Word War II heavy winter flying clothing, Including Jacket, trousers, helmet,
boots and gloves.
11-19
■.■■.•■.•••.:• «3- •.■••:
mriv^ffir'^
f.-.-.:.v 00 ■•.■:■:•:%
Jjj::: OO ;!; v
u->
- U1
o
«3-
ttu.
I/I
_ O
1 «•! 4
a*
0*
c
■o
V
CO
a
o
f
m
CO
o
■o
OO
I
o.
o
14-1
c
>4-{
(U
l/t
OJ ^-N
01
X o
£
j-i r^
u •
C l/t
0^
O ^
JJ
JZ <—
•
4-> ^
(U iH
•5S
3 ct)
T3
tn
4J
jn m
<U 0)
I. <a
N
OJ
4-> (.
1 *
•H (-1
cn OJ
T3
t- >o
>^ c
-«-> Z
T3 n)
C 1
o X
a> t.
^ 0)
(>0
U 0)
tH
on
>
c <;
LlJ
c o
•H
t—
•»—
c
cn o
OJ
00 T3
T3
c c
1—
0) m
>
z
T- -O
c 01
LlJ
cn c
cd to
tJ
>t>
^ to
lO <—
O 43
*-> 1
^
<o 1.
J2
O Ol
4-1 4-1
>
3 c
o
<u
a> 0)
V4 E
60 (X
3 ■•->
•H
■— c
0) D
rtj •!-
60 a*
> X
CD 0)
4-1
a> c
C 13
^ -F-
0) C
•^
a tB
♦J i«
d peri
hing
C -kJ
0) u
U 0)
01 ^
Q. 3
C 4-)
en
n) o
.c
r-H
•M C\J
.-1 U
IT) m
n)
<n
4-J 01
c
I- OJ
C >
<U -H
<♦- "O
<u o
>Q
U 0)
■O E
O 4J
a>
c o
*-> 0)
M >-i
3 I.
o-
•a
I.
OQ
Of
01
c
O. O)
I- I/I
OJ
u
a
60
11-20
TABLE 10
INCKUSE IN DIMENSIONS F?OM PRESSURE SUIT
(BASED ON CLADSER AND HERTZBERG 1964)*
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OE P.OOR QUAIATX
Nude
Unl:
nflated
Inl
'latad
''t*'"''^'*"'
Hedlan
Range
Median
Range
Median
Range
Shoulder clrciflftrcnce
122.66
(48.3)
114.55-128.27
(45.1-50.5)
142.49
(56.1)
138,94-154,9
(54,7-61.0)
160.02
(63.0)
152. 40- 165. 10
(60.0-65.0)
Ch«tt ciTC\Mf«T«ncc
100.58
95.76 107.19
122.68
121,92-132,08
133.35
128.27-137.67
(39.6)
(37.7-42.2)
(48.3)
(48,0-52,0)
(52.5)
(50.5-54.2)
Waltc ctrct^f«rtnc«
87.12
81.28-98.55
112.78
106.68-119,89
120.14
114.81-127.00
(34.3)
(32.0-38.8)
(44.4)
(42.0-47,2)
(47.3)
(45.2-50.0)
Upper thi^ clrctMftrcncc
63.75
56.64-66.04
65.28
65,52-71,12
68.58
64.26-73.66
(25.1)
(22.3-26.0)
(25.7)
(25,8-28,0)
(27.0)
(25,3-29.0)
Lower thigh circmfcrcnct
43.18
39.62-46.99
52.83
46,23-59,94
56.13
53.59-62.23
(17.0)
(15.6-18.5)
(20.8)
(18,2-23.6)
(22.1)
(21.1-24.5)
Calf clrctnf«r«nc*
37.85
36.83-43.18
42.93
41.15-49.28
46.48
42.93-50.55
(14.9)
(14.5-17.0)
(16.9)
(16.2-19.4)
(18.3)
(16.9-19.9)
Ankl* drcuafcrcnc*
23.37
22.61-26.67
30.73
28.96-34.54
30.73
30.48-35.05
( 9.2)
( 8.9-10.5)
(12.1)
(11.4-13.6)
(12.1)
(12.0-13.8)
Blccpi ctrctnfortnct
34.29
32.26-36.83
37.59
35.56-41.40
41.15
37.85-43.18
(13.5)
(12.7-14.5)
(14.8)
(14.0-16.3)
(16.2)
(14.9-17.0)
Wrltt circtnfcronc*
17.78
16.76-18.29
20.57
20.07-21.34
22.86
21.08-23.37
( 7.0)
( 6.6-7.2)
( 8.1)
( 7.9-8.4)
( 9.0)
( 8.3-9.2)
Vertical trunk circu«fcr«ncc
171.20
163.58-181.61
169.67
165,07-177.80
(67.4)
(64.4-71.5)
(66.8)
(65.0-70.0)
Knaa circuafaranca
40.39
38.10-43.43
56.13
50.80-58,42
55.37
50.80-59.44
(15.9)
(15.0-17.1)
(22.1)
(20,0-23,0)
(21.8)
(20.0-23.4)
Vertical trunk circuafaranca
163.07
161.80-171.45
168.9
165,10-176,78
170.94
167.64-178.82
(64.2)
(63.7-67.5)
(66.5)
(65,0-69,6)
(67.3)
(66.0-70.4)
Buttock drcuafaranca
106.68
99.31-115.57
118.62
115,06-129,54
126.75
120.14-129.54
(42.0)
(39.1-45.5)
(46.7)
(45,3-51,0)
(49.9)
(47.3-51.0)
Shoulder breedth
48.77
46.23-50.29
52.32
47,24-55,88
60.20
35.05-64.77
(19.2)
(18.2-19.8)
(20,6)
(18.4-22,0)
(23.7)
(13.8-25.5)
Cheat breadth
33.02
27.69-32.77
35.05
32,26-38,35
37.34
36.58-39.62
(13.0)
(10.9-12.9)
(13.8)
(12,7-15,1)
(14.7)
(14.4-15.6)
Hip breadth
34.80
32.77-36.58
39.12
35,81-41,40
44.20
41.15-47.24
(13.7)
(12.9-14.4)
(15,4)
(14,1-16,3)
(17.4)
(16.2-18.6)
Hip depth
26.16
24.13-X.48
28,96
27,43-29,72
38.10
38.10
(10.3)
( 9.5-12.0)
(11.4)
(10,8-11,7)
(15.0)
(15.0)
Cheat depth
25.90
24.89-27.18
33.27
30,73-34,29
37.85
36.07-38.61
(10.2)
( 9.8-10.7)
(13,1)
(12,1-13,5)
(14.9)
(14.2-15.2)
Elbo<.-elbo> breedth
50.55
47,24-56.13
58,93
52,58-63.75
70.36
65.53-76.45
(19.9)
(18.6-22.1)
(23,2)
(20.7-25.1)
(27.7)
(25.8-30.1)
Knee-knee breadth
20.83
19.81-23.62
30,48
27.18-34.29
54.10
47.24-57.40
( 8.2)
( 7.8-9.3)
(12,0)
(10.7-13.5)
(21.3)
(18.6-22.6)
Sitting height
90.68
88.14-95.76
88.39
85.60-91,95
93.47
90.42-97.79
(35.7)
(34.7-37.7)
(34,8)
(33.7-36.2)
(36.8)
(35.6-38.5)
Eye height
79.25
75.18-83.82
77,22
72.14-80.52
79.50
74.68-81.79
(31.2)
(29.6-33.0)
(30.4)
(28.4-31.7)
(31.3)
(29.4-32.2)
Shoulder height
59.69
57.66-63.25
59.69
56,13-62,23
61.72
59.44-64.26
(23.5)
(22.7-24.9)
(23.5)
(22.1-24.5)
(24.3)
(23.4-25.3)
Knee height
55.63
54.10-37.91
59.18
57.40-60.71
60.96
58.17-62.48
(21.9)
(21.3-22.8)
(23.3)
(22.6-23.9)
(24.0)
(22.9-24.6)
Popliteal height
44.45
43.69-50.29
45.97
43.18-46.74
46.23
42.67-48.01
(17.5)
(17.2-19.8)
(18,1)
(17.0-18.4)
(18.2)
(16.8-18.9)
Clbou raat height
19.8
19.05-23.11
20,83
16.00-25.65
25.40
24.13-27.94
( 7.8)
( 7.5-9.1)
( 8,2)
( 6.3-10.1)
(10.0)
( 9.5-11.0)
Shoulder elbow length
38.1
36.07-39.12)
39.12
36.83-40.89
40.13
38.61-40.64
(15.0)
(14.2-15.4)
(15.4)
(14.5-16.1)
(15.8)
(15.2-16.0)
roraar«-hand length
48.77
46.99-50.80
49.28
48.01-51.56
50.55
47.24-52.58
(19.2)
(18.5-20.0)
(19.4)
(18.9-20.3)
(19.9)
(18.6-20.7)
Foot length
26.67
26.16-27.94
32.00
29.97-32. 26
31.24
29.72-32.00
(10.5)
(lO.l-U.O)
(12.6)
(11.8-12.7)
(12.3)
(U. 7-12. 6)
Hand length
19.56
19.05-21.59
19.05
18.29-19.50
18.03
17.27-19.05
( 7.7)
( 7.5-8.5)
( 7,5)
( ;.2-7.7)
( 7,1)
( 6.8-7.5)
ralB length
11.43
11.18-11.43
8.89
9.91-10.1.2
10.16
8.13-14.99
( 4.5)
( 4.4-4.5)
( 3.5)
( 1.9-4.3)
( 4,0)
( 3.2-5.9)
Crotch height (atanding)
84.56
78.99-88.39
82.30
78.23-84.84
(33.3)
(31.1-34.8)
(32,4)
(30.8-33.'.)
Thigh clearance
16.51
( 6.5)
13.97-18.03
( 5.5-7.1)
16,26
( 6,4)
15.49-17.78
( 6.1-7.0)
20,57
( 8.1)
19.30-20.83
( 7.6-8.2)
*A11 ■•••uraacntB v«rt takci
■Ix Mbjacti wearing the HC
In par«iich«i«s.
on ...ted "Ubject except crotch height. Th... «..ur-.«.t. w a tak.n on
-2 (X-15 type) full pra.aura auit. Dat.. 1. gi.an in centi..t. r. with Inche.
11-21
X
CM
..!-'-.«-P.-.iJ!
:.V.\v.-:' 00 :V:V
:-;&:«^:W
cvj
1
*.CvV* r^ .***''*V
Wi'^M
[v<K ir> J? v!
V^viJ^v^
ii^So^
s^
^
■
CM
.■::-:';^:v^0f:-
*•**•*.'*'■;'•*'***•;**,*!
'••.••%*.'•:":•:
j^^^S^
s
''\v*«* ';**'•'.'•*.'!'
m
^i^^;vivX-xi
CT>
en
*•";*.•;'•-*■".'•■••.'■•■.*:
.
^"\: •.";.' •:'--'''':U
■
■
r.*;vV-''-*-"V*:*-;*
■X'-'* ';'••'* vX*'*'- *
a«
V/,*.y.\*-;.V*V/.'V
■
»« vo
!-:*>Xv.;'/>tv.v'*
^■
SiSvJKv^
»«
'
iD
W!r~r':V:':-''
:v.v-;- cm/.-.v
^/;'-' "^ /;::!•;•:
^-,
\-^-':::,-::A:;l
,
; "ftV. ^ ■■:■:■
•*•!•• ^~ -'.',*.'•*•*.
^—
iv*!'^^**»*'V,*'
ID
,
13
i°8
•J-
^^
.v>- »!»■ X.lv:
:";:;;.'n '.■••.?.
•:-:::"-':"^v'S-
'■
.
Wk^M
^
.c
o>
•^
c
•M
z
o>
k
a>
01
T3
I
3
o>
O
c
f
»/1
■t-»
■o
I
2
T3
1.
CO
01
0>
o
"a
O)
I
jc
T3
<TI
01
i.
00
0)
01
c
I
w
0»
tn
(U
w
(U
x;
■p
c
0)
^
fl
o
a
CM
c
•H
0)
(/]
4-1
<U
■K
JZ
O •
O
4J /-s
c
ON
■H
d ON
■a .-1
•H
(U »
s
N •
ir>
■H rH
tn nj
Q)
>> 4J
C/J
+-)
•a 0)
ca£
(U
o
LlJ
e
•
J3 M
t—
■H
w
OJ
LU
+j
4J
C 'O
Z
c
-H
■H c
•-^
(U
P
to
1—
u
U)
tn X
LlJ
c
3
0) OJ
00 .-1
c <
c
W
£ C
o
(1)
>
0)
CJ O
-H
^
-c -a
CP
Ui
4-1 <u
IT3
CM
tt)
-p
1
(J ^
(0
CO
CiO '^^
Q
CN
CN
0) to
On
60 4J
•
\
nj -H
tn
rt
4-1 3
<u
C tn
P
tP
QJ
.H
c
U 01
• ir>
>
u
(0
(1)
)-l u
(U 3
(U
ex tn
tn
rH
s
•3 (U
■r-i
4-1
Ul
c
4-1
<U
U
1— 1 "O
U
OJ
CO 01
U
-f— 1
4-1 4-1
0)
ft
C ttJ
0) -H
cn
e u-i
x:
5 c
4-1
■^
U -H
in
n
C
o
U
C '4-1
e
M O
tn
u
Q)
• 4-1
in
(0
E
0)
0) y-i
(U
»-l 14-1
4-1
3
0)
3 tu
a
0)
^
E
s
til
O
o
tn
4-1
U)
c
4-1
tu
C
£
«
5)
e
u
0)
D
i-l
tn
o
lO
c
0)
H
S
*
11-22
PERCENTILE MAN
DIMENSION
55!
%i
A - Height
171
45 (67.5)
191.77
(75.5)
B - Maximum breadth at elbows
(arms relaxed)
--
.
74.68
(29.4)
C - Maximum breadth at elbows
(arms at side)
--
._
67.06
(26.4)
D - Maximum depth with portable
life support system (PLSS)
and backup oxygen (OPS)
66
04 (26.0)
72.14
(28.4)
E - Maximum depth without
PLSS/OPS
39
37 (15.5)
45.47
(17.9)
Weight (lb), with PLSS/OPS
143
31 (316.0)
174.73
(385.3)
Weight (lb), without PLSS/OPS
86
30 (190.3)
117.73
(259.6)
* Meaaurenents made on A7L pressure garment assembly, pressurized to 3.75 pslg.
Data given In centimeters and kilograuns with inches and pounds in parentheses.
** To obtain envelope diaensions, 2 inches have been added to maximum chest depth
of suited/pressurized creMsan ior PLSS control box.
Figure 4. Functional envelope dimensions of the fully suited astro-
naut based on NASA Habitability Data Handbook (1971).*
11-23
I 96 cm
(40 In) I
P^ MIN. HATCH ■•n
WIDTH
INGRESS CORRIDOR
96 an
(40 in)
FOR
MOBILITY
20-30 CM
(8-10 in)
'additional
clearance
for egress
Figure 5. Recommended access corridor dimensions to accommodate fully suited
astronaut (data obtained from NASA Internal Note MSC-EC-R-71-10, 1971),
11-24
It should be stressed, before leaving this subject, that body size
changes caused by the addition of protective clothing, are suit-specific.
Each suit or assemblage will result in somewhat different growth increments;
the important point is that such growth is often significant and must be
accommodated in the workspace design.
Effects of Zero-g on Body Size
Many features of man's form and structure resulted from having evolved
in the earth's gravitational force (one-g). Our physiological functions
are one-g adapted as are anatomical features related to our ability to main-
tain an erect posture. It is not surprising that when the force of gravity
is removed for a period of time, changes in body size, shape, function and
composition may occur since it is in opposing gravity that certain body
features remain stable. Physicians since Hippocrates have known that immo-
bility and disuse of the body (reduced dynamic opposition to gravity) result
in tissue atrophy. Prolonged bedrest, a form of hypo dynamism, also brings
on a variety of deconditioning processes including muscular atrophy.
Not until space flight, however, were hypodynamic and hypogravic
effects on body size of direct concern to the design engineer. Early
concerns of medical specialists over the underlying pathology of body changes
and the possibility of their progressive nature have largely been dispelled
by the longer missions. The significance of zero-g body size changes for the
design engineer is that many types of changes observed represent a class of
intra-individual change not previously encountered. A pressure suit custom
fitted at one-g may not be easily donned or comfortable for an astronaut
"adjusted" to weightlessness. Work space carefully laid out and sized for
"earthmen" may not be functional in space.
A discussion of the major anthropometric changes observed in astronauts
during space flight can be found in Chapter I.
Inter- individual Variations in Size
Male-Female Size Differences
One of the primary sources of variability in size between individuals
is the difference between the sexes, a matter of considerable importance
to designers today since women are becoming more frequent participants in
all forms of activity. Areas of design which a few years ago would not have
required consideration of female size and strength no longer exist.
One need hardly point out that, in general, women tend to be smaller
than men. In addition, the sexual tendency for females to deposit subcutane-
11-25
ous fat makes women more rounded. In attempting to assess quantitatively
the size differences between men and women, care must be exercised in selec-
tion of data for comparison. Because of similarities in technique and proxi-
mity in time of completion of the studies, the best available data for com-
parison probably are from the 1967 male U.S. Air T"orce (AMRL unpublished)
and the 1968 female Air Force (Clauser et al . 1972) surveys. The 5th and
95th percentile values for selected body dimensions are compared in Table
11 which shows that the male fliers are heavier and generally larger, as
might be expected.
It has been an accepted rule of thumb that female measurements tend
to average about 92% of comparable male values. The ratios shown in Table
12 indicate that for most linear measurements, the rule holds reasonably
well for the general U.S. populations. A major exception is weight, a non-
linear measurement. The table shows that women's weight is about three-
quarters that of the men. To properly equate weight, an essentially three-
dimensional quantity, with the linear measures, the cube roots of the weights
should be computed. When this is done, the female to male ratio becomes
91,37o, a value clearly consistent with the 92% rule of thumb.
If male-female differences in the mean values for most body dimensions
average only about 87„, what is their significance for designers? The answer
to this question may be approached in several ways. One method is to examine
the range of size differences, especially for dimensions commonly used in
design, between a small female (5th percentile) and a large male (95th
percentile) . This is far from a merely academic exercise since persons
representative of each extreme (in one or more dimensions) may be required to
use or operate the same item or function in the same work space.
Examining again the data from the USAF surveys as shown in Table 11,
it can be seen that the ratio of the 5th percentile females to the 95th
percentile males for most dimensions is considerably lower (i.e., about
72%) than the ratio of the mean values. To illustrate the range of size
difference, selected dimensions are graphed in Figure 6 to show not only
the range of differences, but also the overlap of the 5th and 95th percen-
tiles of each group. (The extreme range of differences, 40 cm. (16 in.)
in waist circumference may be partially attributed to the age difference
between the two groups. The women averaged 23.4 years and the men averaged
30 years of age.)
A second method that may be used to demonstrate the significance of
sexual differences is through the use of bivariate distributions. When the
distribution of the various height-weight combinations is plotted for the
Air Force populations, two partially overlapping ellipses may be drawn which
each encompass about 957. of their respective samples. Examination of Figure
7 will show that while there is considerable overlap, the two groups are
nevertheless quite distinct in these two variables. Because of the well-
known relationship of many other body dimensions to height and weight, it
is apparent that the sexes are quite different in other aspects of body
size as well.
11-26
COMPARISON OF MALES AND FEMALES FOR SELECTED DIMENSIONS ORIGINAL PA..- ^
5TH AND 95TH PERCENTILE VALUES* Q'Q POOR QUALiTi
(FROM 1967 USAF SURVEY UNPUBLISHED AND CLAUSER ET AL. 1972)
Males Females
Variable Sth?. 95thy. 5th% 95th% Ratio **
Weight 63.6 95.6 46.4 70.9 .49
(140.2) (210.8) (102.3) (156.3)
Stature 167.2 187.7 152.4 172.1 .81
(65.8) (73.9) (60.0) (67.8)
Sitting height 88.1 98.6 80.4 90.9 .82
(34.7) (38.8) (31.7) (35.8)
Acromial height 135.7 154.8 123.0 141.1 .79
(53.4) (60.9) (48.4) (55.6)
Waist height 98.7 114.3 93.1 107.9 .81
(38.9) (45.0) (36.7) (42.5)
Crotch height 78.3 92.0 68.1 81.4 .74
(30.8) (36.2) (26.8) (32.0)
Popliteal height 40.1 47.5 38.0 44.1 .80
(15.8) (18.7) (15.0) (17.4)
Thigh clearance height 14.3 18.8 10.4 14.6 .55
( 5.6) ( 7.4) ( 4.1) ( 5.7)
Buttock-knee length 56.1 65.0 53.2 61.9 .82
(22.1) (25.6) (20.9) (24.4)
Sleeve length 85.2 96.8 74.2 85.1 .77
(33.5) (38.1) (29.2) (33.5)
Sleeve inseam 44.4 52.8 40.2 48.2 .76
(17.5) (20.8) (15.8) (19.0)
Hand length 17.8 20.5 16.9 20.1 .82
( 7.0) ( 8.1) ( 6.7) ( 7.9)
Foot length 25.1 29.0 22.2 26.0 .77
( 9.9) (11.4) ( 8.7) (10.2)
Biacromial breadth 37.5 43.8 33.2 38.6 .76
(14.8) (17.2) (13.1) (15.2)
Chest circ. (scye) 92.5 112.4 77.0 93.2 .69
(36.4) (44.3) (30.3) (36.7)
Waist circ. 75.7 100.1 59.5 77.2 .59
(29.8) (39.4) (23.4) (30.4)
Buttock circ. (sitting) 97.1 119.3 90.8 110.8 .76
(38.2) (47.0) (35.7) (43.6)
Thigh circ. 51.5 66.2 48.7 62.6 .74
(20.3) (26.1) (19.2) (24.6)
Calf circ. 33.3 40.6 30.6 38.1 .75
(13.1) (16.0) (12.0) (15.0)
Hand circ. 20.0 23.1 16.8 19.8 .73
( 7.9) ( 9.1) ( 6.6) ( 7.8)
Head circ. 55.2 59.9 52.3 57.6 .87
(21.7) (23.6) (20.6) (22.7)
Biceps circ. (flexed) 28.5 35.9 23.0 30.7 .64
(11.2) (14.1) ( 9.1) (12.1)
*Data given in kilograms and centimeters with pounds and inches in parentheses.
**5th7. Female/95th Male.
11-27
TABLE 12
SELECTED DIMENSIONS OF
(BASED
MALES AND
ON STOUDT
FEMALES IN THE
ET AL. 1965)*
U.S. POPULATION
Variable
MaJ
(25.5-34.
Mean
31.14
(12.26)
Les
.5 years)
S.D.
3.20
1.26
Females
(18.5-24.5 years)
Mean S.D.
26.10 3.40
(10.28) (1.34)
Ratio'
Arm circumference
(biceps)
.84
Biacromial diameter
40.1
(15.79)
2.10
( .83)
35.50
(13.98)
1.90
( .75)
.89
Buttock-knee length
59.79
(23.54)
2.95
(1.16)
56.67
(22.31)
3.18
(1.25)
.95
Buttock-popliteal
length
49.81
(19.61)
3.18
(1.25)
47.80
(18.82)
3.15
(1.24^
.96
Chest circuaiference
99.2
(39.06)
8.30
(3.27)
83.7
(32.95)
6.20
(2.44)
.84
Elbow- elbow breadth
41.55
(16.36)
4.52
(1.78)
33.66
(13.25)
4.11
(1.62)
.81
Elbow rest height
24.64
( 9.70)
2.77
(1.09)
22.76
( 8.96)
2.69
(1.06)
.92
Knee height
54.84
(21.59)
2.82
(1.11)
50.09
(19.72)
2.59
(1.02)
.90
Popliteal height
45.34
(17.85)
2.69
(1.06)
40.59
(15.98)
2.46
( .97)
.90
Seat breadth
35.46
(13.96)
2.87
(1.13)
35.10
(13.82)
3.28
(1.29)
.99
Sitting ht. (erect)
91.44
(36.0)
3.45
(1.36)
85.29
(33.58)
3.20
(1.26)
.92
Sitting ht. (relaxed)
87.12
(34.30)
3.58
(1.41)
82.37
(32.43)
3.45
(1.36)
.95
Stature
175.3
(69.02)
7.00
(2.76)
162.0
(63.78)
6.20
(2.44)
.93
Thigh clearance height
14.71
( 5.79)
1.78
( .70)
13.46
( 5.30)
1.68
( .66)
.92
Waist circumference
86.69
(34.13)
10.69
(4.21)
69.55
(27.38)
9.35
(3.68)
.80
Weight
77.4
(170.45)
13.10
(28.95)
58.9
(129.8)
11.00
(24.33)
.76
♦Data given in centimeters and kilograms (for weight) with Inches and pounds in
parentheses.
♦♦Female X/Male X .
11-28
■':-^'^'-- --•■'''•'-■'■■'■•'■•'-•'■' '-■'-■'-■'-■'-•'^'^'■■yyyjj'y-'-jjyjV.-vj-yyyj
■ui^iittiiimikii^iA
nr^
fmm
DD
— n
o
T
o
("-3) S3mVA 3niiN33a3d His 31VW33 NVHi a3iV3a9 iNOOWV
0)
o
en
O
<n 01
O -u
1-H
(0 c
> 0)
oj s
rH -U
« 0)
e ^
OJ
to
c ^J
CO OJ
>
0) o
■—I
« XI
6 C
•H OJ
■u o
C C
(U QJ
U >-i
l-l 0)
01 U-J
& W-l
•H
^ T3
4-1
0^ o
x: QJ
"-1 c
CO
O
0)
c x;
o -U
to
•H M
M C
CO -H
e o
O X
O CO
<; cn
c
o
vO
cn
c
CU 0)
u B
3 -H
OO T3
&M
11-29
>1
-
<u
>>
>
<u
s-
>
3
S-
l>0
3
00
Ll_
cC
Ll_
OO
•a:
rD
3
1^ CO
en CTi
in
o
O
■00
I—
o
O
O O 0^ CT* 00 00
(6>|) iH9I3fA
OJ
l/l
Q-
.
I—
'
' —
1-1
<U
<u
1 \
c
*♦— '
to
ro
u
•r—
S_
Q-
0)
O
S-
Q.
4)
o
ro
o
O)
<r-l
+->
<
c
•
•^-
in
jr
-!->
P
3
)-i
TD
o
M-l
0)
C
•U •
•r—
J= 0)
ro
00 »— f
•H rt
c
<U E
o
(J
^ 0)
<4-{
-a
en
c -o
•'"
rt c
«
O.
OJ
Z3
u <u
o
3 -H
s-
4-1 CO
cr>
nS g
4->
x:
CO
o
ro
U-l
ttJ
o
H-
CO
o
c
O
s*^
•H
LO
4J
CTl
3
43
>1
•H
1 — ■
U
0)
i-i
-t->
CO
ro
•H
B
Q
•r-
X
o
•
s_
r~
Q-
Q.
0)
•a:
I-I
3
■K
ao
Pm
11-30
Since the standard deviations of body size values, male or female,
average about 57o of the mean, a difference of 87o would mean, in general,
that the body size of females lying approximately one standard deviation
above the female mean value would tend to match the body size of males lying
approximately one standard deviation below the male mean value. "From a design
viewpoint this indicates that system or equipment specifications based on the
anthropometry of male fliers, for example, would have to be modified if
they are to accommodate the body size differences of female users.
Racial/Ethnic Variation in Body Size
To enter upon a lengthy discussion about the definition of "race"
or "ethnic" is outside the purpose of this data book. The term "race" as
used here will be equivalent to the subspecies usage although the convention-
al taxonomic names of Negro, Caucasian and Mongolian for the three major
racial classes have been replaced by the more generalized terms. Black, White
and Oriental respectively. We have included size data for selected examples
of White, Black and Oriental populations. Only American Blacks have been
considered. Whether they, as a population distinct from African Blacks,
have formed or are forming a new race, has not been considered. "Ethnic"
will refer chiefly to national origin of a subject or population.
Body size variability related to ethnic/racial groups is of consider-
able interest to Americans because of the broad spectrum of national origins
that characterizes the American population. Some information on the ethnic
and racial makeup of the U.S. population, as obtained from the 1970 census,
is shown in Table 13 below.
TABLE 13
RACIAL/ETHNIC ORIGINS OF U.S. POPULATION-
(PROM CENSUS BUREAU DATA, APRIL 1970)
Group Number in Percent
Thousands
White 177,784 87.5
Spanish Speaking 10,115 4.9
Black 22,580
Other 2,883
Indian 793
Japanese 591
Chinese 435
Filipino 343
Other 720
11.1
1.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
11-31
Racial/ethnic comparisons can be made by using the 1966 U.S. Army
anthropometric survey data (White and Churchill). In this survey the subjects
were asked to designate their ethnic derivation or national extraction.
There were three categories in which national extraction was not otherwise
specified: American White (29.37.); American Black (14.77.); and American
Indian (1.87.). These categories represent approximately 457. of the total
sample. The remainder of the sample was self-classified into 31 national
origins. It is of some interest to conqjare these groups in terms of gross
body size. Using only the dimensions of height and weight, such a comparison
is given in Table 14. The table lists the mean and standard deviation for
the total sample and shows the deviation of each group from these values.
The sample sizes of some of the subsets are rather small, but they are ade-
quate to indicate the diversity that exists in the various racial/ethnic
components of the military population. These height-weight differences,
while often quite large, still do not tell the complete story of body size
differences.
Young adult males and females of the three principal races may be
compared more broadly by examining the data presented in Tables 15 and 16
and Figures 8 and 9. The U.S. Air Force basic trainee survey of 1965 (Long
and Churchill, 1968) and the Japanese Air Force survey of 1972 (Yokohori)
are the sources of the male data. The female data are selected from measure-
ments obtained from the 1968 survey of U.S. Air Force women (Clauser et
al- 1972) and the Japanese civilian surveys of 1967-68 and 1972-73 (Yanagi-
sawa 1974). In both cases the Black and White data are from the respective
U.S. Air Force surveys. The mean values and standard deviations for selected
measurements for the men and women are presented in Tables 15 and 16. Selec-
ted dimensions are plotted in Figures 8 and 9 in overlapping bar graphs
to demonstrate the range of variation of the males and females of the three
racial groups.
The 343 Black and White males that formed the comparative sample were
selected from the total Air Force survey population (N=3,869) and matched
on the basis of age, length of military service and region of birth; the
females represent the total sample. Height and weight values for both racial
groups are very similar Despite this, there are significant differences
in the mean values for about three quarters of the measurements. The Blacks
have legs, arms, hands and feet which, on the average, are longer than those
of Whites; the reverse is true for measurements of the torso. The Blacks
tend to have longer heads, wider faces, and less body fat.
The Oriental samples cannot be so rigorously compared to the others
as the Blacks and Whites can be to each other, since the Japanese survey
was performed seven years later. The measurement techniques used in each
survey are thought to have been comparable, however. As might be expected,
the data show that the Orientals are on the average somewhat smaller. De-
spite the fact that for these samples the Japanese average nearly 10 cm
(3.9 in.) shorter in stature, the sitting heights of all three groups are
nearly the same. The limb lengths, especially the legs, apparently account
for the vast proportion of the longitudinal difference in size. (See Figure
1) The majority of the circumferences do not appear to be significantly
different. The Whites tend to be the most variable of the three groups.
11-32
t?J^<N00O^tNf^^<^«)l^•nrH00^O-JC05^lg^--CT>O
_!* _lCMC^^,-.^-Jc^^^ -< -^ C-JIICvJ--<
2 I 1111 I i I I I I
ii-,i^iif-iii^^i II I II
^HPnooor*jo^»noovOfn»nf-»«noo>^«-t*-*QOCNeN^^
fsj ^^ p-tincofn^^ «-< f-i^-iCM ,-i,-4
r~. I I I I I I 11 I 11
a.
e
OO •-400"^'~'c^0'^0'-*»-*0'~*»— 'O'-^'"'
•O
CM II I I I I I I I I I I I I I
^^0<l"0«^oocsiQOmo<too<M(NO^r^r^aooor^
so o "^
I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00 «-< CM ^^ CM CM
^ I I L I I I I I I II
cMCOCMooino^aocM»nu-i«-tco^^cMco»— <mt— ioo<J
minoooo-^OcMi^sONOo^o^coNOo^-jxOcMO
•4" <j'\Ocnf^.-Hu-i I I ^HicM
r^ I I I I I I I I
O -J 00 -J- P^ CT^
00 »^ ^^ cn -sj ^^
O CM •—»*-< en
eg
o
CM
O
n
in
<r
m
o
vO
00
<t
o>
,_J
H
•
00
o
00
CM
•— t
CM
r~
I— 1
p-<
CM
u-1
vO
vO
X
o
>o
o^
c^
•—1
f— t
in
00
•— )
o
z
vO
*-^
l-l
u
X
k
Qt
^
c
a
o
U
u
v4
3
11
<v4
<g
T3
r
o
•-(
§
<-4
C
CO
§•
A
M
u
•w4
<•
c
C
c
n\
u
t/l
10
<■
10
c
«4
u
u
u
«
c
^^
1-i
^
-H
u
4J
£
t
u
b
U
<H
u
4J
u
«
1
«
X
V
u
s
1
1
z
3
Cl.
j; C <o in X
m lH <v4 0) lA
■•^ CL •»< C -H X
C -H a <o _■ in
« ^4 3 o. 00 ■ol
Ck -r^ (0 10 c h
OT b. X n u M
«
<»
j:
r.
^
■b
c
•«-4
£
«
m
u
£
M
u
lA
-i^
J=
iJ
«
c
P
4J
•r4
•o
u
^^
8
•-*
«l
u
•1
1-^
w
u
<o
W
u
«
3
o
9
&
M
3
b.
o
<
Bki
V]
M
in
•o
c
3
a
c
H
T3
u
U
00
c
o
00
.— *
•*4
•H
in
^
in
n
T3
1
C
IM
CD
.— 1
01
in
in
u
<u
c
u
o
<u
•H
R
iJ
•M
(0
4-1
u
c
•H
w
VM
u
f^
in
c
in
iH
IS
•— «
c
o
01
>
a.
-i^
3
00
O
u
m
00
u
x>
«
3
Q
(A
* t
11-33
■ •■••••••■
' ^ rg ^ ^ r^
<r m psi -J' <r 'O o
^H p- sO i-< CT« ■* 1-*
^ O O ^ O •-< <N
00*^00-^000*^0^"^^
I (Nj »-^ <r r- m
Sm Q 00 Q <*1 ^ *^ '
-f) Ch r* •? 1^ <N <-• <
.
00 i^ooino^cNin^Cvoo^ '^**!^iD^^'^
"r^-jfO^r^.o^t*^^"^'*'*''^'^
Z4in^^O-^^-*^0'On<M-J<N^o^
1 <N <-• -"I CM ■
^ (M m pst CM i
Sov*'0.n<r.r,<rooo<roo"r-»o<trir-^r-.oocou^.rir;'^o;-o.or-
«Oi-i*o<Dr*<M»-<i/^o»c^«'^-^<x>;Jf-J*£J[r;5i
: s $ S 5 S s ^ ;5 s ^ 5 s -. ^ s :^^ :? 5 ^ ^ ^ -<»; a. ^ c^^ <> cn o; o
nf^u^-^i-^(^^rn<r>^o^oaoa^oo^o^a^<^J'^'^■-'0*o^wo^cMC^»ncM(^lnu-|
2)C5;S52^2S^S2"cMavi-er.r,m<rnojcM^<rcN-^-cM^.n,n
i«Cr^Or^f^'^'^O00u-»O'*'^'^O00<7»^fM*r>-^Of^*O-J*~^'^O'^^"^
\orifn*o<rrM'-<m^^w^.-tin^o»n'JrJ(MCNt^— •^0(M--*OO--'O'-«eM
a)-*<N*inooO'^ao^fn»-*CT*r*.r-p--o^r--aor-)oOvCT'-^'^'^^g:Jf^";^f^a)
SoO"^000(n<DiA^-^^f^^O*^<''«"-^-**^<^OOO^Ocor-tna>inrMcM
4)1
SI _
cD^A00r^0^'OOlncMOoO'^'^O<JQ■J■"^^O^^|^'^CMO^tr^r^nvO^o
vor^oor^-J-oorM^Nomr^fsioocMOvr^chinr-i-j^ntMcsiinM-icM^^cN^irim
•^ X 00
4> U C X
U X 00 41 U
fib
JZ C ^ 00
00 u « c
AJ Of
^ O ^ J 4»
J= X
4j 4) c g ^
ob U 4» ^ *J
00
•H W 4 C 41 <n
j: V
w
4» (A 4) J^ 1 -H
j:: 4* -- 1 u u
tq
U O Ji 4) 3
l>l
c c
u
■a
iH
O J J2 O ^ 3
u
U 4J
£
u 00 u 3 g
O .a -^ iJ O -"
•r4
<0
U U
4i
41
»
cn
cn u>
U
U Ul H A VI bJ
4>
V
r
4)
o
c
u
u
u
c
c
u
c
o
4>
4>
V
c
u-<
u
^M
«
0)
H
4)
u
VM
t
tu
^M
ti-l
4)
u
F
■4-1
3
u
j:
V4
3
p
o
4J
()
IJ
•H
o
•H
ric
u
t-)
o
u
u
-H
u
H-l
)>l
o
4)
o
u
u
u
<n
E
u
4J
JU
o.
«
u
m
4J
OC
V
o
V
u
>.
u
1^
o
,c
(Q
T
j:
«
u
•F*
o
bu
o
»
A
H
u
tn
«
00 4J
-H -O
e Ji 0* 3 J= _
.. -H 3 C w u w "O
^UU3Cl-i00n)
O
•O 4J 4t — ' "O "O
X o
I ^ c
■ V) <
- - U N
V V 4^ 1-4
X X > (£t
11-34
TABLE 16
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF SELECTED DIMENSIONS FOR YOUNG FEMALES OF THREE RACIAL GROUPS
(BASED ON CLAUSER ET AL. 1972)*
Black (U.S.)
Variable
Age
Weight
Stature
Cervlcale height
Acromial height
Sitting height
Waist height
Crotch height
Tlblale height
Foot length
Hand length
Head length
Sleeve length
Head breadth
Head circumference
Bust circumference
(34.3)
Waist circumference 66.4
(26.1)
Hip circumference 93.0
(36.6)
Thigh circumference 54.6
(21.5)
Knee circumference 36.1
(14.2)
Calf circumference 33.5
(13.2)
Ankle clrcianfcrence 20.8
( 8.2)
Biceps circumference 25.0
(relaxed) ( 9.8)
Wrist circumference 15.0
( 5.9)
Vert trunk 149.8
circumference (59.0)
Mean
20.9
56.4
(124.3)
161.3
(63.5)
139.2
(54.8)
131.7
(51.9)
81.3
(32.0)
101.1
(39.8)
76.9
(30.3)
42.8
(16.9)
24.8
( 9.8)
19.2
( 7.6)
18.7
( 7.4)
80.5
(31.7)
14.4
( 5.7)
55.8
(22.0)
87.2
S«D.
3.9
7.1
(15.7)
5.8
( 2.3)
5.4
( 2.1)
5.4
2.1)
3.1
1.2)
4.8
1.9)
4.1
1.6)
2.4
0.9)
1.1
( 0.4)
0.9
( 0.4)
0.7
0.3)
3.5
1.4)
0.6
0.2)
1.5
( 0.6)
4.4
( 1.7)
4.7
( 1.9)
6.2
( 2.4)
4.3
( 1.7)
2.3
( 0.9)
2.5
( 1.0)
1.4
( 0.6)
2.2
( 0.9)
0.8
( 0.3)
5.9
( 2.3)
White (U.S.)
Mean S.D«
Oriental(Japan)
20.3
57.1
(125.9)
161.9
(63.7)
139.0
(54.7)
131.7
(51.9)
84.3
(33.2)
100.0
(39.4)
74.3
(29.3)
41.9
(16.5)
24.0
( 9.4)
18.3
( 7.2)
18.3
( 7.2)
79.3
(31.2)
14.5
( 5.7)
54.6
(21.5)
89.2
(35.1)
66.9
(26.3)
94.8
(37.3)
55.2
(21.7)
36.2
(14.3)
34.2
(13.5)
21.2
( 8.3)
25.4
(10.0)
15.0
' 5.9)
154.0
(60.6)
3.6
7.0
(15.4)
5.9
(2.3)
5.4
(2.1)
5.4
(2.1)
3.1
(1.2)
4.4
(1.7)
3.9
(1.5)
2,3
(0.9)
1.1
(0.4)
0.9
(0.4)
0.7
(0.3)
3.2
(1.3)
0.6
(0.2)
1.6
(0.6)
5.2
(2.0)
5.0
(2.0)
5.7
(2.2)
4.0
(1.6)
2.1
(0.8)
2.2
(0.9)
1.3
(0.5)
2.1
(0.8)
0.7
(0.3)
6.5
(2.6)
Mean
25-39
51.3
(113.1)
153.2
(60.3)
S.D.
(range)
7.0
(15.4)
4.8
(1.9)
93.2
3.7
(36.7)
(1.5)
68.3
3.3
(26.9)
(1.3)
38.6
1.8
(15.2)
(0.7)
22.6
0.9
( 8.9)
(0.4)
68.7
2.5
(27.0)
(1.0)
54.5
1.4
(21.5)
(0.6)
83.6
6.4
(32.9)
(2.5)
67.1
6.3
(26.4)
(2.5)
90.0
5.2
(35.4)
(2.0)
51.5
3.8
(20.3)
(1.5)
33.5
2.2
(13.2)
(0.9)
33.3
2.3
(13.1)
(0.9)
26.7
2.5
(10.5)
(1.0)
147.7
5.9
(58.1)
(2.3)
*Data given in kilograms and centimeters with pounds and Inches in parentheses ; age
in years.
11-35
A 4-) C \\ Ma*M***i****aili
LkJ 0^
on
r imtttmiklU I
^^>x^^v^^^^^^^>^^^^v.v I
\\\\\\N\\\\\\\\
Li_ Li_ -3
CQ 3 O
p ^ < .<^m<is.i ^ .<.^^^s. < . < .^ < .^\<.lvk\\'sVVV^^ ' s'>vJ
— r-
o
>.
•a
Xi
•o
a)
4-1
O
(U
t-l
<u
M
p
o
•
U-1
^
0)
tn
r-l
Cm
•H
3
4-1
O
C
1-1
OJ
W)
O
1-1
r-l
(U
rt
D-
•H
o
^
rt
4-1
1-1
u-i
CTi
0)
01
4-1
!-l
tn
x:
0)
4-1
an
i-i
14-1
nj
O
rH
cn
o
(U
4-1
rH
trt
J=
fc;
4-1
UO
C
OJ
4-1
<u
cn
s
(U
4J
iH
(U
rH
^
tfl
e
c
tn
o
s_^
•H
4-1
tn
nJ
c
-H
o
IJ
•H
m
tn
>
C
01
iw
fi
O
•1-1
•a
(U
60
c
m
eti
0)
3
00
{1U3) S3mVA 31IiN33a3ci Hi5 iS3mVWS NVHi a3i\/3a9 iNnonv
11-36
u_
Ll.
—J
<X
cX
UO
uo
ZD
ZD
.—
" — '
Qj
JlL
c
■♦-'
U
Oj
'O
£■
'_
-S
CO
o
Dl
TrTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
.L
^ '- Am {mmi<m<mMm/<(mifMiMi
li„M,M
N\X\\\\\\\\\\\V\\NX\
\\v\\\\vxv\\\\v\\\\x
■"---'■--'■'-'■'■•■■■-
EtyJiCib
ikUMilllaiiilMiL.
^^^x^^^^^v^vxv^vvxv^
l^^^i^tMiiiMMiiiiiili^^
m.<^ < i<^s^^T^<V^sim\\ < .S^^ i
^N^^^V^^XV^^^^VVVV^VV
m|i|uu^tt i . i ^UA i . i AU. i . i . i A
VN N N \S
"T"
o
>^
XI
o
XI
T3
OJ
■u
o
0)
■H
OJ
cn
!-i
o
14-1
•
^^
w
0)
a.,-1
3
•H
O
4-1
U
c
01]
OJ
O
iH
M
to
OJ
•H
a.
U
m
j=
u
4-1
L/l
(U
ON
0)
1-1
4J
ji:
to
■u
<u
M
14-1
u
o
CO
r-l
V)
0)
O
iH
4-1
w
B
^
OJ
iJ
>4-l
u-1
c
4-J
<u
to
0)
01
3
iH
4J
iH
<U
to
XI
e
m
c
^^^
o
•H
tn
4-1
c
nt
o
•H
•H
)-i
tn
to
C
>
(U
e
14-1
•H
o
■o
<u
on
c
tfl
Pi
a)
S-i
D
M
("13) S3mVA 3TIiN33y3<J Hi5 iS3mvwS NVHi b3iV3a9 iNHOWV
11-37
While individual values for Whites and Blacks overlap to a large extent
(partly as a result of greater variability in the White sample), the body
size differences cited above are of sufficient magnitude to warrant consider-
ation in the design of systems and equipment to be used by both Whites and
Blacks.
National-Ethnic Size Variability
Without regard to racial conposition of a given nation, there are
demonstrable differences in body size when specific intra- or international
groups are compared. This fact is easily ascertained by examination of the
tables in Chapter III and the data in Volume II of this book. Selected por-
tions of that material is presented graphically here in order to demonstrate
national-ethnic variability. For convenience and brevity eleven common dimen-
sions, as measured on the same 12 populations selected for presentation
in Chapter III, have been chosen for presentation here. The 5th and 95th
percentile range for each population (where available) are shown in Figures
10 through 20. The graphs clearly demonstrate the range of variability
between subjects of different national origin and between groups of subjects
of the same national origin (i.e., U.S. civilians and U.S. military person-
nel).
Size Differences Between Persons in Different Occupations
As noted above, dimensional differences are observed vAien anthropome-
tric data from various vocational-professional populations are compared
to data representing the general population. Utilizing the U.S. Health Exam-
ination Survey (HES) data (Stoudt et al. 1965) as a base, and data from
surveys of several vocational-professional populations for coitqDarison, Tables
17 and 18 were developed for males and females respectively. In comparing
data, it should be remembered that the HES was performed somewhat earlier in
time and the average age of the subjects was greater. It is recommended
therefore that rigorous comparisons not be made. The purpose of this
presentation is rather to alert the design engineer to the fact that if the
user of the end item can be classed into a specific occupation, size data
from the same or a similar population should be used wherever possible.
In comparing the male populations, the police are clearly larger than
other individuals. The Air Force trainees are generally smaller but are
also significantly younger. The group of stewardesses tends to be taller
and slimmer than the other female groups. Again, the age of the HES popula-
tion must be considered to affect dimensions such as waist circumference
and elbow-elbow breadth.
Secular Changes In Adult Body Size
The fact that the size of the adult human body is thought to be
increasing over time probably comes as no surprise. The man on the street
will tell you that people are getting taller; older members of a community
will recall "when people were smaller." Evidence shows that today's children
11-38
WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE
Females
-r ©
6
®
<v®
1 . USAF
2. U. S. HEW civilians
3. British civilians
4. Swedish civilians
5. Japanese civilians
(cm)
no^
100-
- 40
38
- 36
90-
- 34
80-
70-
60 -
50 -»
(in)
- 32
-28
-26
]-24
22
Males
-30 _L
(i)®® ®®
®
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Ital ian mi 1 i tary
10. French fliers
1 1 . German Air Force
12. Japanese civilians
Figure 10. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in waist
circumference for selected populations.
11-39
Females
900
(b
STATURE
(an) (in)
190- -75
180-
' r© T
170-
160-
Males
®®
-65
®
-60
150-
140J-55
1 . USAF
2. U. S. HEW civilians
3. British civilians
4. Swedish civilians
5. Japanese civilians
Figure 11. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in stature for
selected populations.
6
USAF fliers
7
NASA astronauts
8
British fliers
9
Italian military
10
French fliers
11
German Air Force
12
Japanese civil ians
II- A
WEIGHT
(kg)
100-
Females
T
90-1-200
6
-r 70-
Q)
©
60-
®
50-
(lbs)
-220
Males
-180^
80- \S}
rod
-160
-140-
Y T
-L ®
-120
-100
1 . USAF
2. U. S. HEW civilians
3. British civilians
4. Swedish civilians
5. Japanese civilians
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Ital ian mi 1 i tary
10. French fliers
11 . German Air Force
12. Japanese ci vi 1 ians
Figure 12. Range of variability (5th-95th percentile) in weight for
selected populations.
11-41
BUTTOCK-KNEE LENGTH
Females
(cm)
70 H
60-
50'
(in)
-26
-24
-22
_-20
Males
1 . USAF
2. U. S. HEW civilians
4. Swedish civilians
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Italian mil itary
10. French fliers
11 . German Air Force
Figure 13. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in buttock-
knee length for selected populations.
11-42
Females
SLEEVE LENGTH
(in)
(cm)
lOOH
- 38
90-
80-
70-
60 -t
-36
- 34
-32
-30
-28
-26
-24
Males
1 . USAF
5. Japanese civilians
6. USAF fliers
9. I tal ian mi 1 i tary
10. French fliers
1 1 . German Air Force
12. Japanese civi lians
Figure 14. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in sleeve
length for selected populations.
11-43
HIP CIRCUMFERENCE
(cm) (in)
120-
Females
®
6
U?
1.
3.
4.
5.
110-
44
1-42
100-
90-
80-
70H
40
h38
36
h34
-32
Ma 1 es
USAF
British civilians
Swedish civilians
Japanese civilians
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Ital ian mi 1 i tary
10. French fliers
11 . German Air Force
12. Japanese civilians
Figure 15. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in hip circumfer-
ence for selected populations.
11-44
Females
^^(^^
BIACROMIAL BREADTH
(cm) (in)
50-
-18
40--^^
-14
30- -12
Males
1.
2.
3.
4.
USAF
U. S. HEW civilians
British civil ians
Swedish civilians
6. USAh fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Ital ian military
10. French fliers
1 1 . German Air Force
Figure 16. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in biacromial
breadth for selected populations.
11-45
Females
TROCHANTERIC HEIGHT
(cm)
(in)
110-
100-
-40
-38
90-
-36
-34
80-
-32
-30
•Trt_
-28
70-
Males
1 . USAF
3. British civilians
4. Swedish civil ians
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
9. Italian military
10. French fliers
11 . German Air Force
Figure 17. Range of variability C5th-95th percentile) in trochanteric
height for selected populations.
11-46
CHEST CIRCUMFERENCE
Females
(cm)
iicr
(in)
Males
-42
T T
-
■
_ T
100-
-40
-38
f t <!' 'i (i (I) 1
)(
c
)(
D
90-
-36
-34
-
•
^
-
-
-
(!
80-
-32
J
^
"
-30
70-
-28
1 . USAF
6.
USAF fliers
2. U. S. HEW civ
lians
7.
NASA astronauts
4. Swedish civil
ans
8.
Br-*ish fliers
5. Japanese civi'
ians
9.
10.
n.
Italian military
French fliers
German Air Force
12.
Japanese
civi
lians
Figure 18. Range of variability C5th— 95th percentile) in chest circumfer-
ence for selected populations.
11-47
Females
CROTCH HEIGHT
(cm) (in)
100
90-
80-
70-
Males
60-
1. USAF 6. USAF fliers
5. Japanese civilians 7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Italian military
10. French fliers
11 . German Air Force
12. Japanese civilians
Figure 19. Range of variability (5th-95th percentile) in crotch
height for selected populations.
11-48
Females
SITTING
HEIGHT
(cm) (in)
100-
-40
■ 38
90-
- 36
- 34
80-
-32
r30
70-1
Males
1 . USAF
2. U. S. HEW civilians
4. Swedish civilians
6. USAF fliers
7. NASA astronauts
8. British fliers
9. Italian military
10. French military
11 . German Air Force
Figure 20. Range of variability (5th-95th percentile) in sitting
height for selected populations.
11-49
TABLE 17
SELECTED DIMENSIONS OF DIFFERENT VOCATIONAL-PROFESSIONAL GROUPS OF U.S.
MALES
Variable
Age
HES^
Mean S.D.
43.2 15.5
'67
USAF ^
Mean S.D.
30.0 6.3
Me.
30
'75
POLICE '^
iTL S.D.
.7 8.7
'65
AF TRAINEES
Mean S.D.
19.3 1.3
•55
^ BUS DRIVER^
Mean S.D.
37.0 8.2
ASTRONAUTS ^
Mean S.D.
28-43 (range)
Weight
75.9
(167.3)
12.6
(27.8)
78,7
(173,5)
9.7
(21.4)
83,
(183,
.3
.6)
12
(26.
.0 68.7
.5)(151.4)
10.2
(22.5)
75.9
(167.3)
12.7
(27.9)
74.5
(164.2)
6.9
(15.2)
Height
173.2
(68.2)
6.8
(2.7)
177,3
(69.8)
6.2
(2,4)
178,
(70.
.1
.1)
5,
(2,
.8
.3)
175.1
(68.9^
6.5
(2.6)
173.6
(68.3)
6.6
(2.6)
176.4
(69.4)
4.7
(1.9)
Blacromlal
breadth
39.6
(15.6)
2.0
(0.8)
40.7
(16.0)
1,9
(0.7)
-
-
39,7
(15.6)
1.9
(0.7)
40.0
(15.7)
1.6
(0.6)
40.5
(15.9)
1.7
(0.7)
Biceps circ.
30.7
(12.1)
3.3
(1.3)
30.8
(12.1)
2.3
(0.9)
_
-
27.3
(10.7)
2.6
(1.0)
-
_
-
-
Chest circ.
99.3
(39.1)
8.4
(3.3)
98.6
(38.8)
6.4
(2.5)
102,
(40,
.2
.2)
7,
(3,
.9
.1)
91.8
(36.1)
1.6
(0.6)
97.8
(38.5)
8.2
(3.2)
97.1
(38.2)
4.8
(1.9)
Waist circ.
88.6
(34.9)
11.4
(4.5)
87.6
(34.5)
7.4
(2.9)
90,
(35,
.6
.7)
9,
(3,
.4
.7)
78.0
(30.7)
7.5
(3.0)
-
-
82.1
(32.3)
4.5
(1.8)
Sitting height
90.4
(35.6)
3.8
(1.5)
93.2
(36.7)
3.2
(1.3)
92,
(36,
,2
,3)
3,
(1.
,4
.3)
91.1
(35.9)
3.5
(1.4)
92.0
(36.2)
3.3
(1.3)
92.4
(36.4)
2.6
(1.0)
Knee height
54.1
(21.3)
2.8
(1.1)
55.8
(22.0)
2.5
(1.0)
55,
(22,
,9
.0)
2,
(1.
.5
.0)
55.4
(21.8)
2.6
(1.0)
55.0
(21.7)
3.3
(1.3)
-
-
Popliteal height
43.9
(17.3)
2.8
(1.1)
43.7
(17.2)
2.3
(0.9)
-
-
44.8
(17.6)
2.4
(0.9)
-
-
-
.
Thigh clearance
height
14.3
(5.6)
1.8
(0.7)
16.5
(6.5)
1.4
(0.6)
_
-
15.0
(5.9)
1.4
(0.6)
_
_
-
-
Buttock-knee
length
59.2
(23.3)
3.0
(1.2)
60.4
(23.8)
2.7
(1.1)
61,
(24.
,5
.2)
2,
(1,
,7
,1)
60.3
(23.7)
2.9
(1.1)
60.3
(23.7)
3.3
(1.3)
60.4
(23.8)
1.5
(0.6)
Seat breadth
35.3
(13.9)
2.8
(1.1)
37.8
(14.9)
2.3
(0.9)
_
.
35.3
(13.9)
2.5
(1.0)
37.0
(14.6)
3.3
(1.3)
-
-
Elbow-elbow
breadth
42.0
(16.5)
4.6
(1.8)
-
-
.
.
.
-
-
-
-
-
Elbow rest height
24.1
(9.5)
3.0
(1.2)
25.2
(9.9)
2.6
(1.0)
-
.
23.5
(9.3)
2.8
(1.1)
-
-
.
-
Butto ck- pop 1 itea 1
length
49.3
(19.4)
3.0
(1.2)
50.4
(19.8)
2.6
(1.0)
.
-
49.4
(19.4)
2.7
(1.1)
-
-
-
-
' Data given in kilograms and cercimeters with pounds and inches in parentheses; age in years.
2 Stoudt et al. 1965.
3 Unpublished data.
'* Martin ec al . 1975.
^ Long and Churchill 1968.
^ Damon and McFarland 1955.
^ Roth 1968.
11-50
TABLE 18 J
SELECTED DIMENSIONS OF DIFFERENT VOCATIONAL-PROFESSIONAL GROUPS OF U.S. FEMALES
'68
Variable
HES
Mean S.D.
STEWARDESSES
Mean S.D.
WA
Mean
F
S.D.
Age
42.6
15.4
22.1
1.6
23.4
6.4
Weight
64.7
(142.6)
13.8
(30.4)
52.8
(116.4)
4.3
(9.5)
57.7
(127.2)
7.5
(16.5)
Height
160.3
(63.1)
6.6
(2.6)
166.2
(65.4)
4.8
(1.9)
162.1
(63.8)
6.0
(2.4)
Bi acromial breadth
35.3
(13.9)
2.0
(0.8)
35.0
(13.8)
1.5
(0.6)
35.8
(14.1)
1.6
(0.6)
Biceps circumference
28.7
(11.3)
4.3
(1.7)
23.3
( 9.2)
1.3
(0.5)
25.6
(10.1)
2.3
(0.9)
Chest circumference
88.1
(34.7)
8.1
(3.2)
85.6
(33.7)
4.0
(1.6)
89.7
(35.3)
5.7
(2.2)
Waist circumference
76.7
(30.2)
11.9
(4.7)
62.2
(24.5)
2.8
(1.1)
67.2
(26.5)
5.5
(2.2)
Sitting ht. (erect)
84.6
(33.3)
3.5
(1.4)
87.0
(34.3)
2.8
(1.1)
85.6
(33.7)
3.2
(1.3)
Knee ht. (sitting)
49.8
(19.6)
2.8
(1.1)
51.9
(20.4)
2.2
(0.9)
^
-
Popliteal height
39.6
(15.6)
2.5
(1.0)
43.5
(17.1)
2.1
(0.8)
41.0
(16.1)
1.9
(0.7)
Thigh clearance height
13.7
( 5.4)
1.8
(0.7)
_
-
12.4
( 4.9)
1.2
(0.5)
Buttock-knee height
56.9
(22.4)
3.0
(1.2)
57.5
(22.6)
2.3
(0.9)
57.4
(22.6)
2.6
(1.0)
Buttock-popliteal
length
48.0
(18.9)
3.0
(1.2)
48.2
(19.0)
2.5
(1.0)
47.7
(18.8)
2.8
(1.1)
Seat breadth (hip)
36.6
(14.4)
3.8
(1.5)
36.8
(14.5)
1.8
(0.7)
33.7
(13.3)
2.1
(0.8)
Elbow-elbow breadth
38.9
(15.3
5.3
(2.1)
33.0
(13.0)
2.3
(0.9)
-
-
Elbow rest height
23.1
( 9.1)
2.8
(1.1)
24.1
( 9.5)
2.5
(1.0)
22.7
( 8.9)
2.5
(1.0)
Data given in kilograms and centimeters with pounds and inches in paren-
theses.
2 Stoudt et al. 1965.
3 Snow et al. 1975.
■* Clauser et al. 1972.
11-51
reach peak height velocity earlier in adolescence and each decade sees them
reach puberty four to five months earlier than the last (Tanner, 1962).
Growth tends to be completed at an earlier age today than it was at the
turn of the century."'
This type of human variation, occurring from generation to generation
over time is usually referred to as secular change by anthropologists.
Whether the effect results from better nutrition, improved health care or
some biological selection process has not been determined and is, in any
case, of no practical significance to design engineers who need to know how
much rather than why. The lengthy lead time required for the design and
production of spacecraft, aircraft and other sophisticated devices is such
that the persons who will eventually use them are, for the most part, only
children when the design specifications are fixed. It is of more than casual
interest, therefore, to anticipate the dimensions of physical size and body
proportion which will exist at a given point in the future.
Records for height and weight for many of the nations of Western Europe
go back as far as 200 years ago. Most of the early data was collected on
military recruits and is therefore for young adult men only. Udjus (1964)
has reviewed stature changes in Norwegian recruits over the past 200 years
and Harbeck (1960) has accumulated stature data for a number of European
countries and Japan extending back to the first half of the 19th century.
The data from both sources are presented in Figure 21 which illustrates
that the trend over time, although somewhat variable, has been for young
adult men to become taller. The rate of increase in stature since 1900 in
the European nations surveyed has ranged from .87 cm (.34 inches) to 1.29
cm (.51 inches) per decade in France and Switzerland respectively.
The demonstration of secular change in stature in the U.S. population,
particularly for men, must also rely on military data. Height and weight
data were collected on Union army personnel during the Civil War (Baxter,
1875; Gould, 1869). Since that time, military surveys of increasing complex-
ity and accuracy have been conducted with increasing frequency. The mean
stature and weight of U.S. soldiers at four points in time are listed in
Table 19. The data indicate that there was little change in stature in the
young American male between 1863 and 1919. In fact, data for recruits between
1906 and 1915 indicate that men were slightly shorter at that time than they
were in the 1860's. Davenport (1921) suggests that this apparent reversal
in the trend to increase in stature over time resulted from the influx of
shorter Southern European immigrants into the U.S. population during the
intervening period. Whether Davenport's suggestion is valid or not, it serves
to point out the dangers in cottparing temporally and technically disjointed
data. Measurement techniques change, measurement personnel are different,
military selection pressures vary and transient environmental factors affect-
ing growth and development may be involved in influencing the data obtained
at any given time. All these variables notwithstanding, the mean stature
values for U.S. males since 1860 have shown a substantial increase, particu-
*A recent publication of the National Center for Health Statistics (Hamill
et al. 1976) concludes that the secular growth trend appears to have stopped
in American children born after 1955-56.
11-52
TABLE 19
MEAN STATURE, WEIGHT AND AGE OF U.S. ARMY SOLDIERS-'^
Stature
Weight
Age
Northern Civil War Recruits (1863)
Northern Civil War Veterans (1865)
World War I Veterans (1919)
World War II Veterans (1942)
U.S. Army (1966)
171.45 (67.5) 61.68 (136.0)
171.96 (67.7) 63.04 (139,0)
171.45 (67.5) 64.17 (141.5)
173.74 (68.4) 70.20 (154.8)
174.50 (68.7) 72.15 (159.1)
22.2
24.3
*Data given in centimeters and kilograms with inches and pounds in
parentheses.
TABLE 20
AVERAGE VALUES FOR SELECTED BODY MEASUREMENTS OF U.S.
FEMALES BORN 1903 to 1933 ^
Year of birth
1903 - 4"
1927
1933'
Age
36 yrs.
41 yrs.
40 yrs
Weight
60.5
63.3
63.7
(133.5)
(139.5)
(140.4)
Height
160.5
163.1
163.6
(63.2)
(64.2)
(64.4)
Hip Circumference
98.6
98.6
100.1
(38.8)
(38.8)
(39.4)
Waist Circumference
74.2
74.7
76.4
(29.2)
(29.4)
(30.1)
Mid- Thigh Circumference
49.8
50.6
-
(19.6)
(19.9)
-
Knee Circumference
35.6
36.6
37.1
(14.0)
(14.4)
(14.6)
Calf Circumference
34.3
34.5
35.1
(13.5)
(13.6)
(13.8)
Ankle Circumference
21.1
21.3
21.6
( 8.3)
( 8.4)
( 8.5)
Waist Height
102.0
-
102.9
(40.2)
-
(40.5)
Crotch Height
72.4
-
76.5
(28.5)
-
(30.1)
Foot Length
-
24.1
24.6
-
( 9.5)
( 9.7)
Data given in centimeters and kilograms with inches and pounds in
parentheses.
"Data from O'Brien (1941).
Data from Cullipher and Delate (1974).
11-53
178'
176-
174.
172
170
168-
V Norway
* Bavaria
* Germany
it Sweden
O Denmark
■ France
a Netherlands
A Switzerland
e Japan
166-
164
162
l.'.4n 1K50
Figure 21. Secular increase in stature of young European and
Japanese males: 18A0-1960. After: Udjus (1964), and
Harbeck (1960).
11-54
larly since the 1900' s, and it is safe to assume that the trend is a real
rather than artifactual one. Stature data for major U.S. surveys (male) are
plotted in Pigure 22. The rate of increase in stature since 1920 is nearly
1.0 cm (.4 in.) per decade, a finding which agrees fairly well with the
European data.
Because most large surveys have historically been associated with
the military, and because women were never drafted and rarely recruited
until World War II, long term secular trends for women are more difficult
to establish. Several dimensions obtained on fairly large and reasonably
comparable samples of adult U.S. women are listed in Table 20. The survey
covered a birth year period of 42 years (1903-1945) corresponding with the
period during which U.S. men showed the most rapid increase in stature.
The general trend is for today's women to be slightly larger for the dimen-
sions listed, when women of the same age are compared.
Whatever the trend, the secular changes in body size are shown by
the military surveys to be significant in systems and equipment design.
As Kennedy (1972) noted, the USAF flying personnel measured in 1967 differed
in a number of important respects from those measured in 1950, and, as a
result, the "...Seat Reference Point to the cockpit eye line, as specified
in MIL-STD-1333 (Cockpit Geometry, Department of Defense, 1969a), and MIL-
STD-33574,5, and 6 (Basic Cockpit Dimensions, Department of Defense, 1969
b, c, d) was increased by 0.5 inches, from 31.0 inches to 31.5 inches. Such
dimensions as sitting height, buttock-knee length, and knee height, sitting,
to name just a few, are extremely critical in determining the basic vertical
and fore-and-aft ejection clearance dimensions in the aircraft cockpit."
In summary, it is essential to recognize that body size, at least
of military populations, is in a dynamic state, and that body size changes
must be documented continuously if systems and equipment requiring long
lead times are to be designed effectively.
Projection of Future Body Size
The chief application of data on secular changes is, of course, in
predicting the size of a future design population. As noted above, the long
lead time required for designing and building complex machines necessitates
predicting size change in the human operator well in advance. Recognizing
the importance of secular size variation and the consequences of ignoring
such change, NASA recently asked the Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory
(AMRL) at Wright Patterson Air Force Base to conduct a study to make predic-
tions of body size through 1985.
The initial assumption of the AMRL study was that it could best be
done by predicting the size of USAF pilots who will be in their mid-thirties
in 1985 and accepting these predictions as being suitable for astronauts
as well. Data from a half dozen past anthropometric surveys of flying person-
nel were analyzed to establish a trend for the stature and weight predictions
while values for close to 200 additional dimensions were estimated by combin-
ing the height/weight data with appropriate regression equations. (For more
complete data on projected anthropometry of 1985 flying personnel, see
Chapter III, Appendix B) .
11-55
X
\
e
\
o
o
o
\
o
\
\
\
o
\
\
\
\
o
I
o
o
o
c
o
00
a\
I
o
00
CO
l-l
nj
E
00
c
D
o
f>s
l-l
o
«-(
(U
u
D
4-1
ca
4-1
tn
c
-a
c
di
u
u
)-l
CO
t-H
3
o
W3
00
^o
/O
"T"
-r
■V
CM
CM
<U
3
11-56
While analysis of past trends is a reasonable way for determining
the dimensions of future astronauts, the process is both time-consuming
and fraught with all the pitfalls that usually attend the manipulation of
complex data. It could be pointed out, for example, that the rate of human
"growth" since the turn of the century is not expected to continue indefin-
itely and, as noted above, there is some evidence that the trend toward
earlier maturity and increased adult size is leveling off (Haraill et al.
1976).
One simple strategy, however, is available for predicting stature
of air and space crews of the near future. In estimating astronaut statures
for a decade hence, it can be assumed that the concern is with men who will
be at least in their early and mid-thirties at that time, if not older.
In a sense, it is not necessary to estimate these men' s statures; one can
go out and measure them. Men with appropriate birth years are already parti-
cipating in USAF pilot and navigator training and other advanced military
and space programs and can be measured at any given moment in time. In 1973
such a survey was carried out at two training bases. Statures and other
data were quickly obtained for about 500 men, 23 to 27 years old, men, that
is, with full growth who would be from 30 to 34 in 1980 and from 35 to 39
in 1985.
Summary
Invariably, a superior product will result if sizing factors related
to the human operator are injected early in the design process. At present,
anthropometric data are by far the best source of sizing information avail-
able to the designer. Once the relevant sizing factors and the target design
population have been identified, the designer must ascertain whether reli-
able and recent anthropometric data are available for that population (See
Volume II). If such data are available, the designer, armed with some under-
standing of statistical forms, must apply them knowledgeably to his problem.
If such data are not available and an immediate survey of the population
cannot be performed, the designer must adjust available data according to
the types of size variability described in this chapter. While the various
categories of variation dealt with here have been treated as though they
were of equal importance, it must, of course, be remembered that each design
problem is unique. Not all sources of human body size variability are equally
relevant to every design task but none of them should be dismissed without
careful consideration.
Although we have attempted to cover major areas of human size varia-
bility relevant to NASA designers, it is not possible in one chapter to
cover exhaustively all sources of such variation. Thus it will be necessary
from time to time for the design engineer to be innovative in the applica-
tion of body size data. On occasion the designer will have to interpolate
11-57
and extrapolate data provided here as well as in other chapters and volumes
of this data book. It has been the aim of this chapter to provide the design
engineer with a sufficient background to stimulate greater awareness of
the sources of body size variability and to guide his approach to the solu-
tions of design problems. In the design of space flight hardware and equip-
ment, consideration of human factors is not just important--it may be criti-
cal.
11-58
REFERENCES
Agostoni, Emilio, and Jere Mead 1964. "Statics of the Respiratory
System," Handbook of Physiology , American Physiological
See. (Washington, D.C.), Vol. 1, sec. 3, pp. 387-409.
Alexander, Milton, and Charles E. Clauser 1965. The Anthropology of
Common Working Positions. AMRL-TR-65-73, Aerospace Medical
Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Alexander, Milton, John W. Garrett, and Michael P. Flannery 1969.
Anthropometric Dimensions of Air Force Pressure-Suited Personnel
for Workspace and Design Criteria " Final Report, AMRL-TR-69-6,
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories , Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio.
Alexander, Milton, Lloyd L. Laubach, and John T. McConville 1976.
Effect of Encumbering Clothing, Personal Protective Equipment and
Restraints on Body Size and Arm Reach Capability of USAF
Aircrewmen . Paper delivered at the Annual Meeting of the
Aerospace Medical Association, May 1, 1976, Bal Harbour, Fla.
Baxter, J. H. 1875. Statistics - Medical and Anthropological of the
Provost-Marshal-General's Bureau Derived From Records of the
Examination for Military Service in the Armies of the United
States During the Late War of Rebellion of Over a Million
Recruits, Drafted Men, Substitutes, and Enrolled Men . Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Bolton, C. B., M. Kenward, R. E. Simpson, and G. M. Turner 1973. An
Anthropometric Survey of 2000 Royal Air Force Aircrew, 1970/71 .
TR-73083, Royal Aircraft Establishment, Ministry of Defense,
Famborough, Hants, England. (Also, AGARDograph No. 181,
Dec. 1974.)
Brozek, J., F. Grande, H. L. Taylor, J. T. Anderson, et al. 1957.
"Changes in Body Weight and Body Dimensions in Men Performing Work
on a Low Calorie Carbohydrate Diet," J. Appl . Physiol.,
10(3):412-420.
Clauser, Charles E. , and H. T. E. Hertzberg 1964. "Size and Motion,"
Bioastronautics Data Book , Paul Webb, ed., NASA SP-3006, pp. 241-
ITT.
Clauser, Charles E., et al. 1972. Anthropometry of Air Force Women .
AMRL-TR-70-5, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Damon, Albert 1964. "Notes on Anthropometric Technique: I. Stature
Against a Wall and Standing Free," Amer. J. Phys . Anth rop. , 22:73-
78.
11-59
Damon, A., and R. A. McFarland 1955. "The Physique of Bus and Truck
Drivers: With a Review of Occupational Anthropometry,"
Amer. J. Phys . Anthrop . , 13(4) : 711-742.
Damon, Albert, Howard W. Stoudt, and Ross A. McFarland 1966. The Human
Body in Equipment Design, Harvard University Press (Cambridge,
Mass . ; .
Davenport, Charles B. 1921. Statistics: Army Anthropology . Vol. 15,
Part One, Medical Dept. U.S. Army, lii the ^World War,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
DePuky, P. 1935. "Physiological Oscillation of the Length of the Body,"
Acta. Orthop. Scand ., 6:338-347.
Dobzhansky, Theodosius 1963. Mankind Evolving , Yale University Press
(New Haven, Conn.).
Emanuel, Irvin, and James T. Barter 1957. Linear Distance Changes over
Body Joints . WADC-TR-56-364, Wright Air Development Center,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Fry, Edward I., and Edmund Churchill 1956. Bodily Dimensions of the
Older Pilot . AMRL-TR-56-459, Aerospace Medical Research
Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Garrow, John Stuart 1974. Energy Balance and Obesity in Man , American
Elsevier Pub. Co. (New York).
Gould, Benjamin A. 1869. Investigations in the Military and Anthropolog-
ical Conditions Statistics of American Soldiers , Hurd and Houghton
^ Cambridge^ .
Gsell, 0. R. 1967. "Longitudinal Gerontological Research Over 10
Years," Geront. Clin . , 9:67-80.
Hamill, P. V. V., T. A. Drizo, C. L. Johnson, R. B. Reed, and
A. F. Roche 1976. NCHS Growth Charts, 1976 . Monthly Vital
Statistics Report, Health Examination Survey Data, HRA 76-1120,
Vol. 25, No. 3, supplement, June 22, 1976. National Center for
Health Statistics, HEW, Public Health Resources Administration,
Rockville, Md.
Hertzberg, H. T. E. 1972. "Engineering Anthropology," Human Engineering
Guide to Equipment Design , revised edition, Harold P. Van Cott and
Robert G. Kmkade , eds . , American Institute for Research
(Washington, D.C.), pp. 467-484.
Hooton, E. A., and C. W. Dupertuis 1951. "Age Changes and Selective
Survival in Irish Males." Studies in Physical Anthropology No. 2,
American Association of Physical Anthropologists and the Wenner-
Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, Edwards Bros.,
Inc. (Ann Arbor, Mich.).
11-60
Ivanovsky, Alexis 1923. "Physical Modifications of the Population of
Russia Under Famine," Amer. J. Phys . Anthrop ., Vl(4) :331-353.
Kennedy, Kenneth W. 1973. "Anthropometry and Kinematics in Crew Station
Design," Crew System Design , Keneth D. Cross and James J. McGrath,
eds., Anacapa Sciences Inc. (NOOO 14-72-C-0105) (Santa Barbara),
pp. 67-79.
Khosla, T. , and W. Z. Billewicz 1967. "Measurement of Change of Body
Weight," Brit. J. Nutrit ., 18:227-239.
Laubach, Lloyd L. , and John T. McConville 1967. "Notes on Anthropomet-
ric Technique: Anthropometric Measurements - Right and Left
Sides," Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop ., 26(3) :367-370.
Martin, J. 1., R. Sabeh, L. L. Driver, T. D. Lowe, R. W. Hintze, and
P. A. C. Peters 1975. Anthropometry of Law Enforcement Officers .
TR-442, Naval Electronics Laboratory Center, San Diego,
Cal. 92152.
Munipov, V. M. , V. P. Zinchenko, B. F. Lomov, P. Y. Shlayen, et al .
1973. Ergonomics: Principles and Recommendations, No. 1 (1970) .
All Union Scientific Research Institute for Aesthetic Styling in
Engineering (Moscow), NASA-TT-F-716 .
O'Brien, Ruth, and William C. Shelton 1941. Women's Measurements for
Garment and Pattern Construction . U.S. Dept. of Agriculture
Miscellaneous Publication No. 454, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C.
Peters, Von T. 1969. "Anthropometrische und Physiologische Grundlagen
zur Gestaltung von Buroarbeitssitzen," Ergonomics , 12(2) : 162-170.
Roth, E. M. 1968. "Anthropometry and temporo-spatial environment," Com -
pendium of Human Responses to the Aerospace Environment , Vol. Ill,
sec. 16, NASA CR-1205.
Sims, E. A., R. F. Goldman, C. M. Gluck, E. S. Horton, P. C. Kelleher,
and J. R. Elkinton 1968. "Experimental Obesity in Man," Trans .
Assoc. Amer. Physicians , LXXXI : 153-170.
Snow, C. C, H. M. Reynolds, and M. A. Allgood 1975. Anthropometry of
Airline Stewardesses . Report No. FAA-AM-75-2, Federal Aviation
Administration Office of Aviation Medicine, Civil Aeromedical
Institute, Oklahoma City, Okla. 73125.
Stoudt, Howard W. , Albert Damon, Ross A. McFarland, and Jean Roberts
1965. Weight, Height, and Selected Body Dimensions of Adults,
United States 1960-1962 . Public Health Service Publication
No. 1000 - Series 11, No. 8, Dept. of Health, Education, and
Welfare, National Center for Health Statistics, Washington, D.C.
Tanner, James M. 1962. Growth at Adolescence , 2nd ed., Blackwell Scien-
tific Publications (Oxford, England).
11-61
0-3
Udjus.Ludvig G. 1964. Anthropometrical Changes in Norwegian Men in the
Twentieth Century . Norwegian Monographs on Medical Science, The
Anatomical Institute Anthropological Dept . , University of Oslo
(Norway) and the Armed Forces Medical Services, Universtets for
laget .
Von Harbeck, Major Rudolf 1960. "Die Korpergrossen 20 Jahriger Manner,"
Wehrdienst and Gesundheit, Abhandlungen aus Wehrmedizin,
Wehrpharmazia, un Wehrveterinaerwesen , 1:308-345.
Yanagisawa, Sumiko 1974. About Japanese Physique and Body Girth, Dept.
of Home Economics . Ochanomizu Institute, Women's University,
Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo.
Yokohori, E. 1972. Anthropometry of JASDF Personnel and Its Application
for Human Engineering . Aeromedical Laboratory, Japanese Air Self
Defense Force, Tachikawa Air Base, Tokyo.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anonymous 1973. Etude Anthropometrique des Personnels Militaires des
Armees (in French) , Anthropoloque Appliquees, 45 rue des Saints-
Peres, Paris 6e, France.
Churchill, Edmund, John T. McConville, Lloyd L. Laubach, and Robert
M. White 1971. Anthropometry of U.S. Army Aviators - 1970 . TR-
72-32-CE, U.S. Army Natick Laboratories, Natick, Mass.
Grunhofer, H. J., and G. Kroh , eds., 1968. A Review of Anthropometric
Data of German Air Force and United States Air Force Flying
Personnel 1967-1968 . AGARDograph No. 205, Advisory Group for
Aerospace Research and Development, North Atlantic Treaty Organi-
zation, Neuilly sur Seine, France.
Hertzberg, H. T. E. , Edmund Churchill, C. W. Dupertuis, Robert M. White,
and Albert Damon 1963. Anthropometric Survey of Turkey, Greece,
and Italy , NATO AGARDograph 73, The MacMillan Co. (New York).
Ingelmark, B. E. , and Thord Lewin 1968. "Anthropometrical Studies on
Swedish Women," Acta Morphologica , 3(2) : 145-178.
Karpinos, Bernard D. 1958. "Height and Weight of Selective Service
Registrants Processed for Military Service During World War II,"
Human Biology , 30(4) . -292-321.
Karpinos, Bernard D. 1961. "Current Height and Weight of Youths of
Military Age," Human Biology , 33(4) :335-354 .
Kemsley, W. F. F. 1957. Women's Measurements and Sizes , Cheltenham
Press Ltd. (Cheltenham, England).
Simons, John C. 1964. "An Introduction to Surface-Free Behavior,"
Ergonomics , 7:22-36.
11-62
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
The following documents are not readily available because of
limited distribution (unpublished or preliminary data). However,
copies/information may be obtained by contacting the author/ source.
Cullipher, James H. , and Edward J. Delate 1974. A New Pantyhose Sizing
System Based on Five Measurements of the Woman's Lower Body . Tex-
tile Fibers Dept . , E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. , Wilmington ,
Del.
Long, Lynda, and Edmund Churchill 1968. Anthropometry of USAF Basic
Trainees - Contrasts of Several Subgroups . Paper prepared for the
1968 meeting of the American Association of Physical
Anthropologists. Unpublished data, Webb Associates.
NASA Astronaut Anthropometric Data - 1976 . National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston,
Tex.
NASA Habitability Handbook 1971. Vol. I., Mobility and Restraint, MSC
03909, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Manned
Spacecraft Center, Houston, Tex.
U.S. Air Force Anthropometric Survey - 1965 . Anthropology Branch,
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio.
U.S. Air Force Anthropometric Survey - 1967 . Anthropology Branch,
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories , Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio. Unpublished data.
White, Robert M. , and Edmund Churchill 1966. The Body Size of Soldiers:
U.S. Army Anthropometry - 1966 . TR-72-51-CE, U.S. Army Natick
Laboratories, Natick, Mass.
11-63
N79- 11 737
CHAPTER III
ANTHROPOMETRY
John T. McConville and Lloyd L. Laubach
Anthropology Research Project
Webb Associates
Anthropometry, the practice of measuring the parts and proportions
of the human body, encompasses a variety of techniques for determining
an almost limitless number of dimensions. Each user of anthropometric data
has his own list of dimensions that he considers essential for his purposes.
Unfortunately, the list of one user seldom coincides with the list pre-
ferred by another. As a consequence, the literature of anthropometry con-
tains many tabulations of data that are unique to a particular investigation,
survey or design situation. At the same time, as the number of measured
variables grows it becomes increasingly difficult to tabulate them in any
usable fashion. In 1942 the young Army Air Force anthropology group included
55 measurements in its anthropometric survey of the body size of aircrewmen
(Randall et al . 1946). In the next major USAF survey, conducted in 1950,
the number of measurements had grown to 132 (Hertzberg et al . 1954), and
in the most recent such survey, conducted in 1967, the number of variables
had reached a total of 190 (Churchill et al. 1977). When the anthropometric
data available on worldwide populations is compiled, with each survey contri-
buting a few unique dimensions, the task of collation and presentation
becomes formidable.
In Volume II of this book we have collected and tabulated the anthro-
pometric data from every survey available to us, making it probably as
comprehensive a reference book as has ever been compiled on the subject. A
condensed and summarized version of this material appears in this chapter.
Data on 59 variables, selected for their relevance to NASA design problems,
are tabulated for 12 U.S. and foreign populations which represent countries
involved in the space shuttle program (see Table 1).
Appendix B contains predicted body- size dimensions for the U.S.
astronaut population of 1985. Data includes estimated measurements of the
same 59 dimensions for average, 5th and 95th percentile men and women based
on a projection of data from military surveys conducted in the past several
decades.
As a further aid to NASA engineers involved in crew station design,
Appendix C describes the most up-to-date two-dimensional drawing board
manikins currently available and provides information on how to obtain
plans for fabricating the models.* Actual patterns for simplified versions
* USAF 2-D manikins developed by Kenneth W. Kennedy, Aerospace Medical Re-
search Laboratories, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
III-l
« I *
M K K M
I = = 8
2
58
2 '^
K K K W K
K K K K K
K K K K
-^ k «
i — i
i — *«
2i
IT > •
K MHHMMM M
K K K K K
KKKXXKKK W
K M K K K K
K X
K K K K K
: K K K K
rt ^ e
4; |S2|
ir
-•6
c «
at •
c w -,
■M X ■«
K K K M
X K K K M
X K K K :
X XX
M X X X X
XXX X
1- •»
£i >
H Z M
•M e w
-t i -o --
^ X — e a
4 - " - -
in b
IH
-fi ;
b t( « A
i- t-
tf fc M h. «■ ►" *■ *
XX XI
^ X « -« «•
- *i —
' m
3^J!i
5 u b
^- 1
3 k.
VI U X
-- e
"it
1
& a
e e u h b
1 S
1
! Si
5
we*
u Ji A
•« « ■«
• e e
Mm
. e «
Reproduced from
best available copy.
III-2
of these manikins are provided in the Appendix for the designer who does
not require the full capabilities of the more complicated USAF 2-D manikin.
Detailed instructions are given to enable the user to trace, cut out and
assemble serviceable quarter-scale 5th, 50th and 95th percentile manikins.
Measurement Techniques
It is difficult to document the numerous subtle differences in the
techniques of measurement, landmark definition or interpretation inherent
in data from such a wide variety of sources as is presented here. Although
in many instances these differences are of little practical significance,
in some cases they may be important to the design engineer. Certainly
it is essential that he be aware that such variations exist when he compares
anthropometric data from different sources.
Traditionally in the United States, anthropometric studies have
employed a set of instruments like those shown in Figure 1. The anthropo-
meter (A and B) , the basic tool of the anthropometrist, is used to measure
all linear dimensions. The detached upper half (A) forms a beam caliper
to measure breadths, depths and segment lengths. The smaller sliding (C)
and spreading (D) calipers are used primarily to measure dimensions of
the head, face, hands and feet. The steel tape (E) is used for body circum-
ferences.
Despite periodic attempts to develop worldwide standardization of
anthropometric procedures (Papillault, 1906; Stewart, 1947; Hertzberg, 1968;
Tanner et al. 1969) other instruments and techniques are sometimes used in
other countries. During World War II Morant and Gilson (1945) developed an
anthropometric procedure in England which is still widely used by British
military establishments in body size surveys and by many of the military
groups in British Commonwealth countries.
In the most recent anthropometric survey of RAF aircrew (Bolton
et al. 1973), a modified Morant rig was used to make the measurements.
In order to compare techniques, four measurements were retaken using the
instruments and methods normally employed by USAF anthropometrists. The
data, analyzed and reported by Turner (1974), indicate that the differences
are statistically significant for three of the four measurements (stature,
sitting height and bideltoid breadth) and not significant for buttock-knee
length. Comparisons are illustrated in Table 2.
Turner concluded, however, that the magnitude of the individual
differences between values obtained by the two techniques were on the level
of experimental error, that is, equivalent to the variation in results
obtained by repeated measurements of the same subject and thus, for all
practical purposes, there were no differences between the four measurements
studied.
III-3
Ifl
■p
G
0)
E
D
U
+J
m
c
•H
M
4-1
0)
B
ft
o
■p
c
<
V4
D
•H
Reproduced from
best available copy.
III-A
llk.k
1770.0
-4.4
p<0.050
0.25
.996
936.0
929.6
-6.4
p<0.001
0.68
.956
607.6
607.3
-0.3
NS
0.05
.930
465.8
469.8
4.0
p<0.001
0.86
.909
TABLE 2
COMPARISON OF UK AND USAF MEASURING TECHNIQUES-
Dimension UK USAF A Significance A% r
Stature
Sitting height
Buttock-knee
length
Bideltoid breadth 465.8
*Mean values in mm.
Not all such comparisons, however, result in such comforting conclu-
sions. Damon (1964) described the differences between two standard methods
of measuring adult stature. In one, the subject stands against a wall and
is measured with a right-angled device; in the other, he is measured free-
standing, with an anthropometer. The differences in technique gave mean
results that ranged from 0.2 to 0.8 inches for four groups of men measured
under various conditions, with the wall measurement giving the average
greater stature.
A number of new methods, aimed at measuring man in three dimensions,
are in various stages of development and show much promise for future anthro-
pometric studies. Andrometry is a photographic technique for obtaining
three-dimensional coordinates of bodily feature for purposes of accurately
determining the size and location of the human operator's anatomy in three-
dimensional space (Chaffee 1961). In stereophotogrammetry two or more cameras
are used to provide an image from which can be obtained accurate measures
of three-dimensional size and shape. While both these methods are well
advanced in the experimental stages, no body of anthropometric data has
yet resulted. Various other forms of stereometry involving ultrasonics,
infra red imagery and laser beams have been conceived for recording precise
images for anthropometric uses but as yet these are untried.
While none of the data reported in this book were obtained by any
of the three-dimensional techniques described above, much of it was generated
by anthropometrists in different times and places using variations of the
classic methods. When we found serious discrepancies resulting from differ-
ences in technique, we either re-assigned data to another variable which
we felt more accurately described the measurement, or deleted the data
altogether if we found it incomprehensible. We do not, however, claim that
all the remaining data in these volumes are absolutely comparable. The
user must make the judgement, within the framework of a particular design
problem, about whether differences in instruments, measuring techniques
or landmarks will be of practical significance. If small differences will
affect his results, it is incumbent upon the user to consult the original
survey and make his own assessment or to refer to the excellent two-volume
III-5
study, A Collation of Anthropometry by Garrett and Kennedy (1971), in which
anthropometric data from some 47 sources have been reviewed and collated
to determine the degree of equivalence in measurement techniques.
Variations in positioning subjects is another potential source of
artifactual variance in anthropometric measurements. In many studies, subject
posture has been standardized to assure that the variation found in body
size within a group is truly that associated with body size and not a com-
pounding of this variance by differences in body stance.
For the measurements made on the body standing erect, the subject's
body weight is evenly distributed on both feet, heels together as closely
as possible, legs and torso straight without stiffness and head erect with
the line of vision parallel to the floor. The arms hang straight but loosely
at the sides with the palms alongside but not touching the thighs. This
posture is similar to the position of military attention but without the
stiffness or bracing often associated with it.
To assume the standard posture in sitting erect, the subject sits
on a cushionless flat surface, feet on an adjustable footrest so that the
knees are flexed to 90 degrees, the long axis of the thighs parallel. The
trunk is erect without stiffness and the head is also erect with the path
of vision parallel to the plane of the floor. The upper arms are hanging
loosely at the sides with elbows flexed at 90 degrees while forearms and
hands are held at right angles to the body. Once more, the user is cautioned
to consult the original source if comparative data suggests that techniques
have not been comparable and if the resulting differences will be significant
in the design.
The anthropometric data assembled here and in Volume II are for
the nude or lightly clothed body in a standardized posture. Increments
for clothing and variations in body posture must be estimated or ascertained.
A number of approximations for various clothing and personal protective
equipment assemblages have been detailed in Chapter II. Every possible
combination of body covering has not, of course, been studied with regard
to its effect on body sizing and it rests with the designer either to ascer-
tain what these increments will be for a particular design situation or
to select the best available approximation from the incremental data given
in Chapter II.
The Data
The 59 dimensions tabulated on the following data pages are believed
to be those most relevant to current design problems and the populations se-
lected for inclusion are judged to be those most representative of persons
likely to participate in shuttle missions. The complete references to the
selected sample populations are listed below:
III-6
USAF Women:
U.S. HEW Civ:
(Men & Women)
Clauser, Charles E., Pearl E. Tucker, John T. McConville,
E. Churchill, Lloyd L. Laubach, and Joan A. Reardon. 1972.
AMRL-TR-70-5, Anthropometry of Air Force Women , Aerospace Me-
dical Research Laboratories, Wright Patterson Air Force
Base, Ohio.
Stoudt, Howard W., Albert Damon, Ross McFarland, and Jean
Roberts. 1965. Weight, Height, and Selected Body Dimensions
of Adults , Washington, D.C.: National Center for Health Sta-
tistics, Series 11, Number 8, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare.
Stoudt, Howard W., Albert Damon, Ross A. McFarland, and Jean
Roberts. 1970. Skinfolds, Body Girths, Biacromial Diameter,
and Selected Anthropometric Indices of Adults , Washington,
D.C.: National Center for Health Statistics, Series 11, Num-
ber 35, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
British Civ:
(Women)
Kemsley, W. F. F. 1957. Women's Measurements and Sizes . Chel-
tenham Press Ltd., Cheltenham, England.
Swedish Civ:
(Women)
Ingelmark, E. E., and Thord Lewin. 1968. "Anthropometrical
Studies on Swedish Women," Acta Morphologica , Vol. VII, No.
2, pp. 145-178.
Japanese Civ: Yanagisawa, Suraiko. 1974. About Japanese Physique and Body
(Men & Women) Girth (in Japanese), Tokyo, Japan: Department of Home Econ-
omics, Ochanomizu Institute, Women's University, Bunkyo-Ku.
USAF Flying Unpublished United States Air Force Systems Command Anthropo-
Personnel: metric Data of Flying Personnel, furnished to Webb Associates
(Men) Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio by the Aerospace Medical Research
Laboratories, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, 1967.
NASA Astro- Unpublished National Aeronautics and Space Administration
nauts; - Astronaut Anthropometric Data, furnished to Webb Associ-
(Men) ates, Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio by John T. Jackson, NASA
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Man-Machine Engineering Sec-
tion, Houston, Texas, 1976.
Roth, E. M., "Anthropometry and Temporo-Spatial Environment,"
Volume III, Section 16 in Compendium of Human Responses to
the Aerospace Environment . 1968. Washington, D.C.: National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA CR-1205(III) .
RAF Flying Bolton, C. B., M. Kenward, R. E. Simpson, and G. M. Turner.
Personnel: 1973. An Anthropometric Survey of 2000 Royal Air Force Air-
(Male) crew, 1970/1971 , Royal Aircraft Establishment Technical Re-
port 73083, Procurement Executive, Ministry of Defense, Farn-
borough, Hants, England.
III-7
Italian Mill- Hertzberg, H. T. E., Edmund Churchill, C. Wesley Dupertuis,
tary: Robert M. White, and Albert Damon. 1963. Anthropometric Sur-
(Men) vev of Turkey. Greece and Italy , New York: The Macmillan
Company .
French Fliers: Anonymous. 1973. Etude Anthropometrique des Personnels Mili-
(Men) taires des Armees (French text). Anthropologic Appliquee,
45 rue des Saints-Peres, Paris 6e, France.
German Air Grunhofer, H. J., and G. Kroh (eds.). 1975. A Review of An-
Force: thropometric Data of German Air Force and United States Air
(Men) Force Flying Personnel 1967-1968 . AGARDograph No. 205, Advi-
sory Group for Aerospace Research and Development, North
Atlantic Treaty Organization, Neuilly sur Seine, France.
It should be noted that the publication date of the reference does
not always coincide with the survey date (e.g., the anthropometric data on
USAF women were measured during the spring and summer months of 1968, but
the report was published in 1970). When we were able to ascertain the survey
date, it has been included on each individual data page.
It will readily become apparent to the user of the anthropometric
data that we do not have information on every anthropometric dimension for
each of our selected 12 samples. As has been noted, every survey is planned
around a somewhat different set of dimensions, and seldom if ever do such
lists coincide. Table 1 summarizes the anthropometric data available for
the sample populations.
On each of the 59 data pages, the text supplies the name of the dimen-
sion, an illustrative sketch, a brief description of the measurement and
a guide to its possible applications. Data tabulated for each dimension in-
clude: the date of the study, the sample size, the age range of the sample,
and the mean, standard deviation and 5th and 95th percentile values in both
centimeters and inches for that dimension.
Measurement of the body requires the use of landmarks and anatomical
terminology that may not be familiar to the user of this handbook. A glossary
of such terras has, therefore, been included as Appendix A to this chapter.
The reader is referred to Volume II for data on a much expanded list of
dimensions and populations.
Drawings in the following section are illustrative; where there ap-
pears to be any discrepancy between the drawing and the measurement defini-
tion the written definition should be considered the more accurate.
jII-8
WEIGHT
Definition ; Nude body weight as measured on phy-
sician' s scales.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: structural support
for seats, platforms, couches, and
body-restraint systems and harness
rigging.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Des
X
.criptive
SD
Statist
57,ile
ics*
957<.ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
57.73
(127.27)
7.52
(16.58)
46.4
(102.3)
70.9
(156.3)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
62.38
(137.52)
14.26
(31.44)
46.0
(101.4)
85.4
(197.1)
British
Civ.
1957
4989
18-55+
60.40
(133.15)
10.00
(22.05)
46.6
(102.7)
79.4
(175.0)
Swedish Civ.
1968
210
20-49
59.26
(130.64)
6.65
(14.66)
48.3
(106.5)
70.2
(154.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
51.30
(113.09)
7.00
(15.43)
39.8
(87.7)
(138.4)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
78.74
(173.58)
9.72
(21.43)
63.6
(140.2)
95.6
(210.8)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
59
28-43
74.51
(164.26)
6.92
(15.26)
65.1
(143.5)
87.3
(192.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1998
18-45
75.04
(165.43)
8.81
(19.42)
61.4
(135.4)
90.3
(199.1)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
70.2 5
(154.87)
8.42
(18.56)
57.6
(127.0)
85.1
(187.6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
74.0
(163.1)
8.10
(17.9)
60.6
(133.6)
88.3
(194.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
74.73
(164.74)
8.10
(17.86)
62.2
(137.1)
88.8
(195.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
60.20
(132.71)
8.60
(18.96)
46.1
(101.6)
74.3
(163.8)
*Data given in kilograms with pounds in parentheses.
III-9
Definition:
Application ;
STATURE
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the top of the head.
The subject stands erect and looks
straight ahead.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout-specifically, clear-
ances;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: vertical clearances
of workspaces and living quarters
as well as prone or supine clearance
of beds, litters, etc.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Sub i .
Age
Range
Des
X
criptive
SD
Statist
57oile
i c s "
95%ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
162.1
(63.8)
6.0
(2.4)
152.4
(60.0)
172.1
(67.8)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
161.7
(63.7)
6.3
(2.5)
151.3
(59.6)
171.5
(67.7)
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
160.1
(63.0)
6.6
(2.6)
149.5
(58.9)
171.2
(67.4)
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
164.7
(64.8)
6.1
(2.4)
154.6
(60.9)
174.7
(68.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
153.2
(60.3)
4.8
(1.9)
145.3
(57.2)
161.1
(63.4)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
177.3
(69.8)
6.2
(2.4)
167.2
(65.8)
187.7
(73.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
60
28-43
176.4
(69.4)
4.7
(1.9)
167.4
(65.9)
182.8
(72.0)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
177.4
(69.8)
6.2
(2.4)
167.3
(67.4)
187.8
(73.9)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
170.8
(67.2)
6.2
(2.4)
160.2
(63.1)
180.8
(71.2)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
175.6
(69.1)
5.3
(2.1)
166.9
(65.7)
184.6
(72.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
176.7
(69.6)
6.2
(2.4)
166.8
(65.7)
187.1
(73.7)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
165.3
(65.1)
5.8
(2.3)
155.8
(61.3)
174.8
(68.8)
'■Data given in centimeters with incites in parentheses.
Ill- 10
Definition:
Application;
ACROMIAL (SHOULDER) HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the most lateral point
of the acromial process of the scap-
ula. The subject stands erect and
looks straight ahead.
General body description;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De!
X
3criptiv€
SD
Statis
5%ile
tics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
131.9
(51.9)
5.5
(2.2)
123.0
(48.4)
141.1
(55.6)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
133.8
(52.7)
4.5
(1.8)
126.4
(49.8)
141.1
(55.6)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
145.2
(57.2)
5.8
(2.3)
135.7
(53.4)
154.8
(60.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
53
28-43
144.2
(56.8)
4.3
(1.7)
136.7
(5 3.8)
150.9
(59.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
138.9
(54.7)
5.7
(2.2)
129.4
(50.9)
148.2
(58.3)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
144.7
(57.0)
5.0
(2.0)
136.3
(53.7)
152.5
(60.0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
147.2
(58.0)
5.8
(2.3)
137.6
(54.2)
156.9
(61.8)
Japanese
Civ.
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-ll
Definition:
Application;
WAIST HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the waist landmark.
The subject stands erect and looks
straight ahead.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: height of work sur-
face for standing operation.
Sample &
Reference
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
Freneh
Fliers
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
Survey
Date
1968
1968
1967-68
1972-73
No. of
Subj.
1905
214
1622
1967
Dates
Vary
1970-71
1960
19-'5
2420
57
IMT
1342
Age
Range
18-56
20-49
25-39
1004
1967-68
1972-73
1870
21-50
28-43
18-45
18-59
Not
Reported
_Descriptive Statistics'''
X
100.3
(39.5)
25-39
98.2
(38.7)
93.2
(36.7)
106.5
(41.9)
SD
4.5
(1.8)
4.1
(1.6)
106.8
(42.0)
107.4
(42.3)
101.3
(39.9)
106.6
(42.0)
96.2
(37.9)1
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses
3.7
(1.5)
4.7
(1.9)
57oile
93.1
(36.7)
5l.i
(36.0)
87.1
(34.3)
3.7
(1.5)
5.1
(2.0)
4.9
(1.9)
4.8
(1.9)
4.1
(1.6)
98.7
(38.9)
100.7
(39.6)
(39.1)
95%ile
93.0
(36.6)
58.9
(38.9)
89.5
(35.2)
107.9
(42.5)
104.8
(41.3)
99.5
(39.1)
114.3
(45.0)
113.8
(44.8)
116.1
(45.7)
109.2
(43.0)
114.6
(45.1)
102.9
(40.5)
III-12
Definition:
Application :
CROTCH HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface up into the crotch until
light contact is made. The subject
stands erect, heels approximately 10
cm. apart, and weight distributed
equally on both feet.
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_ Descriptive Statistics*
X SD 57oile 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
74.5
(29.3)
4.0
(1.6)
68.1
(26.8)
81. 4
(32.0)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1972-73
1622
25-39
6S.3
(26.9)
3.3
(1.3)
62.9
(24.8)
73.7
(29.0)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
85.1
(33.5)
4.2
(1.7)
78.3
(30.8)
92.0
(36.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
60
28-43
83.5
(32.9)
3.0
(1.2)
7S.6
(30.9)
88.7
(34.9)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
85.4
(33.6)
4.3
(1.7)
78.4
(30.9)
(36.4)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
80.7
(31.8)
4.2
(1.7)
73.6
(29.0)
87.6
(34.5)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
81.8
(32.2)
3.3
(1.3)
76.9
(30.3)
87.8
(34.6)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
83.8
(33.0)
4.2
id. 7)
76.9
(30.3)
90.8
(35-7)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
73.6
(29.0)
3.7
(1.5)
67.5
(26.6)
79.7
(31.4)
^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-13
Definition:
TROCHANTERIC HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the most superior
point of the greater trochanter of
the femur. The subject stands erect
looking straight ahead, heels toge-
ther and weight distributed equally
on both feet.
Application ; Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptive
SD
Statistics*
57oile 957<,ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
82.7
(32.6)
4.3
(1.7)
75.7
(29.8)
89.8
(35.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
80.4
(31.7)
4.4
(1.7)
73.3
(28.9)
87.7
(34.5)
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
83.6
(32.9)
4.0
(1.6)
77.0
(30.3)
90.2
(35.5)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
94.0
(37.0)
4.4
(1.7)
86.9
(34.2)
101.3
(39.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
56
28-43
92.0
(36.2)
3.3
(1.3)
87.1
(34.3)
97.8
(38.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
88.8
(35.0)
4.4
(1.7)
81.5
(32.1)
96.0
(37.8)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
92.2
(36.3)
3.6
(1.4)
86.6
(34.1)
98.5
(38.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
91.8
(36.1)
4.6
(1.8)
84.2
(33. )
99.5
(39.2)
Japanese
Civ.
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-14
Definition:
TIBIALE HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the proximal medial
margin of the tibia. The subject
stands erect, heels together and
weight distributed equally on both
feet.
Application ; Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Descriptiv(
X 1 SD
; Statistics'"
57oile I 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
42.0
(16.5)
2.4
(0.9)
38.2
(15.0)
46.
(18. )
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
43.0
(16.9)
2.7
(1.1)
38.7
(15.2)
47.5
(18.7)
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
43.9
(17.3)
4.6
(1.8)
36.4
(14.3)
51.4
(20.2)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
38.6
(15.2)
1.8
(0.7)
35.6
(14.0)
41.6
(16.4)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
24
28-43
46.6
(18.3)
1.7
(0.7)
43.8
(17.2)
49.4
(19.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
46.2
(18.2)
2.0
(0.8)
42.8
(16.9)
49.0
(19.3)
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
42.1
(16.6)
2.0
(0.8)
38.8
(15.3)
45.4
(17.9)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-15
CALF HEIGHT
Definition ; The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the maximum posterior
protrusion of the gastrocnemius. The
subject stands erect, heels together
and weight distributed equally on
both feet.
Application ; Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De£
X
criptive
SD
Statis
57oile
tics^-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
35.6
(14.0)
2.2
(0.9)
32.0
(12.6)
39.3
(15.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
34.6
(13.6)
2.1
(0.8)
31.2
(12.3)
38.1
(15.0)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
35.1
(13.8)
2.4
(0.9)
31.2
(12.3)
39.3
(15.5)
Japanese
Giv.
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-16
Definition:
Application :
ANKLE HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the level of the
minimum circumference of the ankle.
The subject stands with his weight
equally distributed on both feet.
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scriptiv(
SD
2 Statist
5%ile
ics*
957oile
TEHALE.S
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
11.2
(4.4)
1.4
(0.6)
9.2
(3.6)
13.6
(5.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ,
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
13.7
(5.4)
1.2
(0.5)
12.0
(4.7)
15.8
(6.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
12.9
(5.1)
0.6
(0.2)
11.9
(4.7)
13.9
(5.5)
French
Fliers
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
III- 17
Definition:
ELBOW HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the depression at
the elbow between the humerus and
the radius. The subject stands erect
with his arms hanging naturally at
his sides.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Sub i .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statist
57oile
:ics'''
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
112.3
(44.2)
4.6
(1.8)
104.8
(41.3)
120.0
(47.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
106. 1
(41.8)
4.6
(1.8)
98.5
(38.8)
113.7
(44.8)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
110.9
(43.7)
4.5
(1.8)
103.6
(40.8)
118.6
(46.7)
Japanese
Civ.
'•'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-18
Definition:
Application ;
WRIST HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the stand-
ing surface to the most distal point
of the ulna. The subject stands erect
with his arms hanging naturally at
his sides.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Des<
X
:riptive
SD
Statist
57oile
ics-'^
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
86.6
(34.1)
3.9
(1.5)
80.2
(31.6)
93.3
(36.7)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
81.5
(32.1)
3.7
(1.5)
75.4
(29.7)
87.6
(34.5)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
87.2
(34.3)
4.0
(1.6)
80.6
(31.7)
94.0
(37.0)
Japanese
Civ.
'"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-19
SITTING HEIGHT
Definition ; The vertical distance froin the sit-
ting surface to the top of the head.
The subject sits erect, looking
straight ahead.
Application ; General body description;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: minimum vertical
clearance from the seat surface of
the seated operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Sub i .
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptiv
SD
8 Statis
57oile
:ics'''
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
85.6
(33.7)
3.2
(1.3)
80.4
(31,7)
90.9
(35.8)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
85.6
(33.7)
3.3
(1.3)
75.5
(31.5)
91.4
(36.0)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
87.3
(34.4)
3.0
(1.2)
82.3
(32.4)
92.2
(36.3)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
93.2
(36.7)
3.2
(1.3)
88.1
(34.7)
98.6
(38.8)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Varv
28
28-43
92.4
(36.4)
2.6
(1.0)
88.1
(34.7)
96.7
(38.1)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
93.6
(36.9)
3.1
(1.2)
88.4
(34.8)
98.6
(38.8)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
89.7
(35.3)
3.2
(1.3)
84.3
(33.2)
94.8
(37.3)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
93.2
(36.7)
3.0
(1.2)
88.3
(34.8)
97. 5
(38.3)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
91.3
(35.9)
3.1
(1.2)
86.1
(33.9)
96.5
(38.0)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-20
EYE HEIGHT, SITTING
Definition ; The vertical distance from the sit-
ting surface to the outer corner
(external canthus) of the eye. The
subject sits erect and looks straight
ahead.
Application ; General body description;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design; vertical distance
from the seat surface to operator's
eye position for optimum vision of
workspace.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De£
X
jcriptiv
SD
e Statist
57oile
:ics"
95%ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
73.7
(29.0)
3.1
(1.2)
68.7
(27.0)
78.8
(31.0)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
81.0
(31.9)
3.0
(1.2)
76.2
(30.0)
86.1
(33.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
24
28-43
80.7
(31.8)
2.9
(1.1)
75.9
(29.9)
85.5
(33.7)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
78.0
(30.7)
3.0
(1.2)
73.1
(28.8)
82.9
(32.6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
83.4
(32.8)
3.2
(1.3)
77.5
(30.5)
87.7
(34.5)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
80.0
(31.5)
3.1
(1.2)
74.7
(29.4)
84.9
(33.4)
Japanese
Civ.
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-21
Definition:
Application ;
MIDSHOULDER HEIGHT, SITTING
The vertical distance froir. the sit-
ting surface to a point on the upper
surface of the shoulder midway be-
tween the acromiale and the neck. The
subject sits erect with his upper
arms hanging relaxed and forearms
and hands extended forward horizon-
tally.
Sizing of clothing;
Personal protective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: placement of upper
torso restraint for seated operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Des
X
criptive
SD
Statist
57oile
ics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
58.0
(22.8)
2.7
(1.1)
53.7
(21.1)
62.5
(24.6)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
64.6
(25.4)
2.7
(1.1)
60.2
(23.7)
69.2
(27.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
61.3
(24.1)
2.6
(1.0)
57.1
(22.5)
65.6
(25.8)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
62.3
(24.5)
2.8
(1.1)
57.5
(22.6)
66.8
(26.3)
Japanese
Civ.
■Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-22
Definition:
Application ;
ELBOW REST HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the sit-
ting surface to the bottom of the
elbow. The subject sits erect with
his upper arms hanging relaxed and
forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally.
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: vertical distance
from the seat surface to the top
of the arm rest for the seated opera-
tor.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
5%ile
tics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
22.7
(8.9)
2.5
(1.0)
18.7
(7.4)
26.9
(10.6)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
23.6
(9.3)
2.8
(1.1)
18.9
(7.4)
28.4
(11.2)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
212
20-49
23.0
(9.1)
2.3
(0.9)
19.2
(7.6)
26.7
(10.5)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
25.2
(9.9)
2.6
(1.0)
20.9
(8.2)
29.5
(11.6)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
24.8
(9.8)
2.5
(1.0)
20.7
(8.1)
28.9
(11.4)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
22.5
(8.9)
2.3
(0.9)
18.8
(7.4)
26.2
(10.3)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
25.6
(10.1)
2.2
(0.9)
22.0
(8.7)
28.8
(11.3^
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
23.9
(9.4)
2.7
(1.1)
19.3
(7.6)
28.4
(11.2)
Japanese
Civ.
'''Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-23
KNEE HEIGHT, SITTING
Definition ; The vertical distance from the floor
to the uppermost point on the knee.
The subject sits erect with his knees
and ankles at right angles.
Application : Workspace layout;
Equipment design: vertical clearance
from the floor to the underside of
work surfaces and consoles for the
seated operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Ranee
_Desc
X
;riptive
SD
. Statist
57oile
ics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
50.0
(19.7)
2.7
(1.1)
45.5
(17.9)
54.6
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
55.8
(22.0)
2.5
(1.0)
51.7
(20.4)
59.9
(23.6)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
55.9
(22.0)
2.5
(1.0)
51.9
(20.4)
60.3
(23.7)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
53.4
(21.0)
2.6
(1.0)
49.2
(19.4)
57.9
(22.8)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
55.4
(21.8)
1.9
(0.7)
52.5
(20.7)
58.1
(22.9)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
54.5
(21.5)
2.5
(1.0)
50.6
(19.9)
58.8
(23.1)
Japanese
Civ.
'"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses
III-24
Definition:
Application ;
POPLITEAL HEIGHT
The vertical distance from the floor
to the underside of the thigh immedi-
ately behind the knee. The subject
sits erect with his knees and ankles
at right angles.
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: vertical distance
from the floor to the top forward
edge of the seat pan for the seated
operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Des(
X
;riptiv(
SD
2 Statisi
57oile
^ics''^
957<.ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
41.1
(16.2)
1.9
(0.7)
38.0
(15.0)
44.1
(17. )
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
40.0
(15.7)
2.6
(1.0)
35.8
(14.1)
44.3
(17.4)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
43.7
(17.2)
2.3
(0.9)
40.1
(15.8)
47.5
(18.7)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
40.3
(15.9)
2.3
(0.9)
35.6
(14.4)
44.2
(17.4)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
45.6
(18.0)
1.5
(0.6)
42.6
(16.8)
47.7
(18.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
43.8
(17.2)
2.1
(0.8)
40.4
(15.9)
47.4
(18.7)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-25
Definition:
Application;
SHOULDER- ELBOW LENGTH
The distance from the top of the
acromion process to the bottom of
the elbow. The subject sits erect
with his upper arms vertical and
forearms and hands extended forward
horizontally.
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: used in conjunction
with shoulder height and shoulder
height sitting to establish the ver-
tical placement of work surfaces and
controls.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi •
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statist
57oile
:ics"-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
36.0
(14.2)
1.7
(0.7)
33.2
(13.1)
38.8
(15.3)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Varv
57
28-43
36.5
(14.4)
1.5
(0.6)
34.5
(13.6)
39.5
(15.6)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
35.6
(14.0)
1.7
(0.7)
32.9
(13.0)
38.5
(15.2)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
32.2
(12.7)
1.7
(0.7)
30.0
(U.8)
34.7
(13.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
36.6
(14.4)
2.1
(0.8)
33.1
(13.0)
39.9
(15.7)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-26
Definition:
Application ;
FOREARM-HAND LENGTH
The distance from the tip of the
elbow to the tip of the longest
finger. The subject sits erect with
his upper arms vertical and forearms
and hands extended forward horizon-
tally.
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: a minimum fingertip
reach distance for workplace layout
with the upper arm restrained.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Descriptive Statis
X 1 SD 1 57oile
ticS"
957„ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
44.2
(17.4)
2.5
(1.0)
40.2
(15.8)
48.2
(19.0)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
28
28-43
47.6
(18.7)
2.0
(0.8)
44.3
(17.4)
50.9
(20.0)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1999
18-45
48.0
(18.9)
2.0
(0.8)
44.7
(17.6)
51.4
(20.2)
Italian
Military
French
Fliers
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-27
Definition:
Application :
BUTTOCK-POPLITEAL LENGTH
The horizontal distance from the most
posterior aspect of the right buttock
to the back of the lower leg at the
knee. The subject sits erect with his
knees and ankles at right angles.
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: horizontal distance
from the rear to the front edge
of the seat pan to accommodate the
thigh length of the seated operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
47.7
(18.8)
2.8
(1.1)
43.5
(17.1)
52.6
(20.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
48.1
(18.9)
3.1
(1.2)
43.0
(16.9)
53.6
(21.1)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
50.4
(19.8)
2.6
(1.0)
46.1
(18.1)
54.6
(21.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
48.0
(18.9)
2.5
(1.0)
44.1
(17.4)
52.2
(20,6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
49.0
(19.3)
2.0
(0.8)
46.3
(18.2)
52.0
(20.5)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
48.9
(19.3)
2.5
(1.0)
44.8
(17.6)
53.0
(20.9)
Japanese
Civ.
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
lII-2{
BUTTOCK-KNEE LENGTH
Definition ; The horizontal distance from the most
posterior aspect of the right buttock
to the most anterior aspect of the
right kneecap. The subject sits erect
with his knees and ankles at right
angles.
Application ; Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: horizontal clear-
ance from the front surface of the
seat back rest to accommodate the
upper leg length of the seated opera-
tor.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptive Statistics--
SD 1 57oile 1 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
57.4
(22.6)
2.6
(1.0)
53.2
(20.9)
61.9
(24.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
57.1
(22.5)
3.1
(1.2)
52.0
(20.5)
62.8
(24.7)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
58.6
(23.1)
3.1
(1.2)
53.6
(21.1)
63.6
(25.0)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
60.4
(23.8)
2.7
(1.1)
56.1
(22.1)
65.0
(25.6)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
23
28-43
60.4
(23.8)
1.5
(0.6)
57.9
(22.8)
62.9
(24.8)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
60.8
(23.9)
2.7
(1.1)
56.4
(22.2)
65.2
(25.7)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
58.2
(22.9)
2.6
(1.0)
54.1
(21.3)
62.6
(24.6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
59.5
(23.4)
2.2
(0.9)
56.3
(22.2)
63.1
(24.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
60.2
(23.7)
2.6
(1.0)
56.0
(22.0)
64.6
(25.4)
Japanese
Civ.
^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-29
Definition:
Application ;
THUMB- TIP REACH
The horizontal distance from
the wall to the tip of the
thumb, measured with the sub-
ject' s back against the wall,
his arm extended forward, and
his index finger touching the
tip of his thumb.
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: a minimum
forward thumbtip reach dis-
tance with shoulder and torso
restrained.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_Desc
X
riptive
SD
Statist
57oile
ics''<-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
74.1
(29.2)
3.9
(1.5)
67.7
(26.7)
80.5
(31.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
80.3
(31.6)
4.0
(1.6)
73.9
(29.1)
87.0
(34.3)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1997
18-45
80.2
(31.6)
3.6
(1.4)
74.4
(29.3)
85.1
(33.5)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
75.3
(29.6)
3.7
(1.5)
69.3
(27.3)
81.6
(32.1)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
80.0
(31.5)
4.3
(1.7)
73.1
(28.8)
87.1
(34.3)
Japanese
Civ.
•Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-30
Definition:
Application :
THIGH CLEARANCE
The vertical distance from the sit-
ting surface to the highest point on
the right thigh. The subject sits
erect with his knees and ankles at
right angles.
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: vertical clearance
from the top of the seat surface
to the underside of work tables and
consoles for the seated operator.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Ranee
_Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics--'
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
12.4
(4.9)
1.3
(0.5)
10.4
(4.1)
14.6
(5.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
13.9
(5.5)
1.9
(0.7)
10.7
(4.2)
17.8
(7.0)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
15.4
(6.1)
1.3
(0.5)
13.2
(5.2)
17.5
(6.9)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
16.5
(6.5)
1.4
(0.6)
14.3
(5.6)
18.8
(7.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
588
18-45
15.8
(6.2)
1.2
(0.5)
13.9
(5.5)
17.8
(7.0)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
16.1
(6.3)
1.1
(0.4)
14.4
(5.7)
18.0
(7.1)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
14.5
(5.7)
1.1
(0.4)
12.7
(5.0)
16.4
(6.5)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
15.5
(6.1)
1.5
(0.6)
13.2
(5.2)
18.0
(7.1)
Japanese
Civ.
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-31
BIACROMIAL BREADTH
Definition ; The horizontal distance across the
body between the acromial landmarks.
The subject stands erect with arms
hanging naturally at her sides.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Desc
X
.riptive
SD
Statist
5%ile
ics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
35.8
(14.1)
1.6
(0.6)
33.2
(13.1)
38.6
(15.2)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
35.7
(14.1)
1.9
(0.7)
32.3
(12.7)
39.1
(15.4)
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
35.1
(13.8)
1.9
(0.7)
32.0
(12.6)
38.1
(15.0)
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
35.4
(13.9)
1.5
(0.6)
32.9
(13.0)
37.8
(14.9)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
40.7
(16.0)
1.9
(0.7)
37,5
(14.8)
43.8
(17.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
52
28-43
40.5
(15.9)
1.7
(0.7)
38.0
(15.0)
43.5
(17.1)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
40.7
(16.0)
1.9
(0.7)
37.5
(14.8)
43.8
(17.2)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
39.8
(15.7)
1.8
(0.7)
36.8
(14.5)
42.8
(16.9)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
39.9
(15.7)
1.8
(0.7)
37.0
(14.6)
42.6
(16.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
38.5
(15.2)
2.4
(0.9)
34.3
(13.5)
42.3
(16.7)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
ni-32
BIDELTOID (SHOULDER) BREADTH
Definition: The horizontal distance across the
body at the level of the deltoid
landmarks. The subject stands erect
with his arms hanging naturally at
his sides.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: clearance dimension
of crawlway, hatches, and the like,
and minimum breadth of cockpits and
other workspaces.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scriptive Statistics"
SD 1 5%ile I 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
41.9
(16.5)
2.3
(0.9)
38.2
(15.0)
45.9
(18.1)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
48.2
(19.0)
2.6
(1.0)
44.1
(17.4)
52.6
(20.7)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
56
28-43
48.0
(18.9)
1.9
(0.7)
44.6
(17.6)
51.0
(20.1)
RAF Flying
Personnel
-_ 1970-71
1993
18-45
46.6
(18.3)
2.1
(0.8)
43.2
(17.0)
50.1
(19.7)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
46.2
(18.2)
2.2
(0.9)
42.8
(16.9)
49.9
(19.6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
47.6
(18.7)
2.1
(0.8)
43.4
(17.1)
50.6
(19.9)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
46.2
(18.2)
2.4
(0.9)
42.4
(16.7)
50.2
(19.8)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses
III-33
Definition:
Application ;
HIP BREADTH, SITTING
The maximum horizontal distance a-
cross the thighs. The subject sits
erect, upper arms relaxed, forearms
and hands extended forward horizon-
tally, thighs completely supported by
the sitting surface, and the long
axis of the thighs parallel.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and models;
Equipment design: horizontal breadth
of sitting support surfaces.
S amp 1 e &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptii
SD
/e Statis
5%ile
:ics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
36.4
(14.3)
3.7
(1.5)
31.1
(12.2)
43.3
(17.0)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
37.8
(14.9)
2.3
(0.9)
34.2
(13.5)
41.8
(16.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
27
28-43
36.5
(14.4)
1.5
(0.6)
34.0
(13.4)
39.0
(15.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
36.8
(14.5)
2.0
(0.8)
33.7
(13.3)
40.0
(15.7)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
35.7
(14.1)
1.8
(0.7)
32.7
(12.9)
38.7
(15.2)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
36.8
(14.5)
1.9
(0.7)
33.9
(13.3)
39.5
(15.6)
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-34
CHEST (BUST) DEPTH
Definition ; The horizontal depth of the trunk
at the level of the nipples. The
subject stands erect, looking straight
ahead, heels together, and weight dis-
tributed equally on both feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
Descriptive Statistics"
X 1 SD 1 57oile 1 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
23.6
( 9.3)
1.9
(0.7)
20.9
( 8.2)
27.2
(10.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
24.5
( 9.6)
1.9
(0.7)
21.3
( 8.4)
27.7
(10.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
28
28-43
24.0
( 9.4)
(1.6
(0.6)
21.4
( 8.4)
26.6
(10.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
23.8
( 9.4)
1.7
(0.7)
21.1
( 8.3)
26.8 ■
(10.6)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
25.1
( 9.9)
1.7
(0.7)
22.7
( 8.9)
28.0
(11.0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
23.2
( 9.1)
2.0
(0.8)
20.1
( 7.9)
26.7
(10.5)
Japanese
Civ.
'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-35
CHEST BREADTH
Definition ; The horizontal distance across the
trunk at the level of the nipples.
The subject stands erect, looking
straight ahead, with his arms slight-
ly abducted.
Application : General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Equipment design: clearance breadth
of torso-worn personal protective
equipment such as respirator packs ,
rigid body armor, and back packs.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics *
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
28.0
(11.0)
1.9
(0.7)
25.1
( 9.9)
31.4
(12.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
213
20-49
25.3
(10.0)
1.2
(0.5)
23.3
( 9.2)
27.4
(10.8)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
32.8
(12.9)
2.1
(0.8)
29.5
(11.6)
36.5
(14.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
57
28-43
32.1
(12.6)
1.9
(0.7)
29.3
(11.5)
35.6
(14.0)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
31.8
(12.5)
1.8
(0.7)
29.0
(11.4)
34.9
(13.7)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
32.1
(12.6)
1.9
(0.7)
2^,0
(11.4)
35.7
(14.1)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
31.3
(12.3)
2.3
(0.9)
27.7
(10.9)
35.4
(13.9)
Japanese
Civ.
■
'^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-36
Definition:
HIP BREADTH
The maximum horizontal distance a-
cross the hips. The subject stands
erect, heels together and weight dis-
tributed equally on both feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout.
S amp 1 e &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De£
X
criptive
SD
Statist
5%ile
ics*
957„ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
35.0
(13.8)
2.2
(0.9)
31.6
(12.4)
38.8
(15.3)
U.S, HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
35.3
(13.9)
1.9
(0.7)
32.3
(12.7)
38.5
(15.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
56
28-43
34.7
(13.7)
1.7
(0.7)
31.7
(12.5)
37.6
(14.8)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
34.2
(13.5)
1.7
(0.7)
31.5
(12.4)
37.1
(14.6)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
35.2
(13.9)
1.8
(0.7)
32.3
(12.7)
38.3
(15.1)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-37
Definition:
NECK CIRCUMFERENCE
The maximum circumference of the neck
at a point just inferior to the bulge
of the thyroid cartilage. The subject
sits erect, head in the Frankfort
plane.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Sub i .
Age
Range
Desc
X
;riptiv£
SD
! Statist
57a le
ics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
33.8
(13.3)
1.7
(0.7)
31.1
(12.2)
36.7
(14.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
38.4
(15.1)
2.0
(0.8)
35.3
(12,9)
41.7
(16.4)
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
37.1
(14.6)
1.7
(0.7)
34,3
(13.5)
39.9
(15.7)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
38.3
(15.1)
1.9
(0.7)
35.4
(13.9)
41.7
(16.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
50
28-43
38.2
(15.0)
1.8
(0.7)
35.0
(13.8)
41.1
(1^.2)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
38.2
(15.0)
1.7
(0,7)
35.5
(14.0)
41.0
(16.1)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
37.6
(14.8)
1.7
(0.7)
35.2
(13.9)
40.7
(16.0)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
37.9
(14.9)
2.0
(0.8)
34.9
(13.7)
41.0
(16.1)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
38.1
(15.0)
1.7
(0.7)
35.4
(13.9)
41.2
(16.2)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
36.0
(14,2)
1.9
(0.7)
32.9
(13.0)
39.1
(15.4)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses
III-38
SHOULDER CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition ; The horizontal circumference of the
body over the deltoid muscles. The
subject stands erect, looking straight
ahead, arms relaxed at the sides, heels
together, and weight distributed equal-
ly on both feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
^Descriptive Statis
X i SD 1 57oile
tics-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
100.4
(39.5)
5.1
(2.0)
92.6
(36.5)
109.4
(43.1)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
117.7
(46.3)
5.8
(2.3)
108.4
(42.7)
127.6
(50.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Varv
56
28-43
116.2
4.3
(1.7)
109.7
(43.2)
123.8
(48.7)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
112.8
(44.4)
5.0
(2.0)
105.0
(41.3)
121.4
(47.8)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
115.6
(45.5)
5.2
(2.0)
106.4
(41.9)
122.7
(48.3)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
115.7
(45.6)
5.6
(2.2)
106.7
(42.0)
125.3
(49.3)
Japanese
Civ.
'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-39
CHEST CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition ; The horizontal circumference of the
chest at the level of the nipples.
The subject stands erect, looking
straight ahead, heels together, and
weight distributed equally on both
feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Equipment design; upper torso re-
straint systems and rigging.
San^jle &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scripti\
SD
re Statis
5%ile
.ties*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
89.7
(35.3)
5.7
(2.2)
81.6
(32.1)
100.2
(39.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
86.6
(34.1)
7.9
(3.1)
76.6
(30.2)
101.8
(40.1)
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
92.7
(36.5)
8.7
(3.4)
81.5
(32.1)
109.6
(43.1)
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
86.0
(33.9)
4.6
(1.8)
78.5
(30.9)
93.4
(36.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
83.6
(32.9)
6.4
(2.5)
73.1
(28.8)
94.1
(37.0)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
98.6
(38.8)
6.4
(2.5)
88.6
(34.9)
109.4
(43.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
53
28-43
97.1
(38.2)
4.8
(1.9)
90.1
(35.5)
107.1
(42.2)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1999
18-45
97.2
(38.3)
5.7
(2.2)
88.3
(34.8)
107.1
(42.2)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
94.9
(37.4)
5.2
(2,0)
87.0
(34.3)
104.0
( 40. 9)
French
Fliers
1973
65
2 7-32
96.0
(37.8)
5.8
(2.3)
86.6
(34.1)
104.1
(41.0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
94.7
(37.3)
6.3
(2.5)
84.7
(33.3)
105.3
(41.5)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
88.1
(34.7)
5.3
(2.1)
79.4
(31.3)
96.8
(38.1)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-40
Definition:
WAIST CIRCUMFERENCE
The horizontal circumference of the
trunk at the level of the waist land-
marks. Subject stands erect, looking
straight ahead, heels together and
weight distributed equally on both
feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subj.
Age
Range
_Descriptive Statistics*
X SD 5%ile 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
67.2
(26.5)
5.5
(2.2)
59.5
(23.4)
77.2
(30.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
73.6
(29.0)
11.0
(4.3)
60.9
(24.0)
95.1
(37.4)
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
68.3
(26.9)
8.9
(3.5)
58.1
(22.9)
86.2
(33.9)
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
67.7
(26.7)
4.2
(1.7)
60.8
(23.9)
74.6
(29.4)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
67.1
(26.4)
6.3
(2.5)
56.7
(22.3)
77.5
(30.5)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
87.6
(34.5)
7.4
(2.9)9
75
(29
.7
100.1
(39.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
59
28-43
82.1
(32.3)
4.5
(1.8)
74
(29
.7
90.2
(35.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1662
18-45
85.7
(33.7)
7.0
(2.8)
74,
(29,
97.8
(38.5)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
82.4
(32.4)
7.1
(2.8)
72
(28
.3
95.3
(37.5)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
84.8
(33.4)
6.3
(2.5)
74
(29
.4
94.0
(37,0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
84.0
(33.1)
6.8
(2.7)
73
(28
.5
:L9i
96.1
(37.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
76.5
(30.1)
7.9
(3.1)
63
(25
.5
89.5
(35.2)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-41
Definition:
Application ;
BUTTOCK CIRCUMFERENCE
The circumference of the hips at the
level of the maximum posterior pro-
trusion of the buttocks. The subject
stands erect, looking straight ahead,
heels together, and weight distribu-
ted equally on both feet.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics"
95%ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
95.3
(37.5)
6.0
(2.4)
85.8
(33.8)
105.6
(41.6)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4994
18-55+
97.6
(38.4)
7.9
(3.1)
87.0
(34.3)
112.4
(44.3)
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
88.1
(34.7)
6.1
(2.4)
78.1
(30.7)
98.0
(38.6)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
90.0
(35.4)
5.2
(2.0)
81.4
(32.0)
98.6
(38.8)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
98.6
(38.8)
5.5
(2.2)
89.7
(35.3)
107.9
(42.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
58
28-43
96.1
(37.8)
4.0
(1.6)
89.5
(35.2)
102.8
(40.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1999
18-45
98.9
(38.9)
5.0
(2.0)
90.8
(35.7)
107.3
(42.2)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
95.1
(37.4)
4.9
(1.9)
87.3
(34.4)
103.4
(40.7)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
96.5
(38.0)
5.0
(2.0)
87.8
(34.6)
104.0
(40.9)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
96.6
(38.0)
4.7
(1.9)
89.1
(35.1)
104.5
(41.1)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
90.3
(35.6)
5.2
(2.0)
81.7
(32.2)
98.9
(38.9)
■^''Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-42
THIGH CIRCIMFERENCE
Definition ; The circumference of the thigh at
the level of the gluteal furrow.
The subject stands erect, heels ap-
proximately 10 cm. apart, and weight
distributed equally on both sides.
Application : General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
Survey
Date
1968
No. of
Subj .
1905
Age
Range
18-56
_Descriptive Statistics"-^'
X SD 57oile I 957oile
55.5
(21.9)
4.2
(1-7)
48.7
(19.2)
62.6
(24.6)
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
56.3
(22.2)
4.7
(1.9)
48.7
(19.2)
64.0
(25.2)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
51.5
(20.3)
3.8
(1.5)
45.2
(17.8)
57.8
(22.8)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
58.8
(23.1)
4.4
(1.7)
51.5
20.3)
66.2
(26.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
57
28-43
56.9
(22.4)
2.9
(1.1)
52.3
20.6)
61.8
(24.3)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
57.0
(22.4)
3.9
(1-5)
50.6
19.9)
63.3
(24.9)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
54.5
(21.5)
3.5
(1.4)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
48.8
19.2)
55.8
(22.0)
3.8
(1.5)
48.2
19.0)
60.3
(23.7)
62.0
(24.4)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
55.9
(22.0)
3.5
(1.4)
50.3
19.8)
61.7
(24.3)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
50.3
(19.8)
3.9
(1.5)
43.9
17.3)
56.7
(22.3)
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-43
KNEE CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition : The circumference of the knee at
the level of the midpatella landmark.
The subject stands erect, heels ap-
proximately 10 cm. apart, and weight
distributed equally on both feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptivt
SD
; Statist
57oile
ics*
957.ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
36.3
(14.3)
2.3
(0.9)
32.8
(12.9)
40.2
(15.8)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1557
A994
18-55+
35.3
(14.0)
2.6
(1.0)
31.7
(12.5)
40.0
(15.7)
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
33.5
(13.2)
2.2
(0.9)
29.9
(11,8)
37.1
(14.6)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
38.7
(15.2)
2.1
(0.8)
35.4
(13.9)
42.2
(16.6)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
52
28-43
39.5
(15.6)
2.1
(0.8)
37.0
(14.6)
43.3
(17.0)
•RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
38.1
(15.0)
1.9
(0.7)
35.1
(13.8)
41.5
(16.3)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reportec
38.0
(15.0)
1.9
(0.7)
35.0
(13.8)
41.0
(16.1)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
34.6
(13.6)
2.0
(0.8)
31.3
(12.3)
37.9
(14.9)
*Data given in c
entimeters
with inch€
;s in par
entheses
•
III-44
Definition:
Application ;
CALF CIRCUMFERENCE
The maximum horizontal circumference
of the calf. The subject stands e-
rect, heels approximately 10 cm. a-
part, and weight distributed equally
on both feet.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptii
SD
/e Statist
57,ile
tics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
34.1
(13.4)
2.3
(0.9)
30.6
(12.0)
37.9
(14.9)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4994
18-55+
34.6
(13.6)
2.6
(1.0)
30.6
(12.0)
39.1
(15.4)
Swedish Civ.
1968
212
20-49
35.4
(13.9)
2.6
(1.0)
31.1
(12.2)
39.7
(15.6)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
33.3
(13.1)
2.3
(0.9)
29.5
(11.6)
37.1
(14.6)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
37.2
(14.6)
2.3
(0.9)
33.5
(13.2)
41.0
(16.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
57
28-43
38.3
(15.1)
2.1
(0.8)
34.8
(13.7)
41.7
(16.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
36.7
(14.4)
2.2
(0.9)
33.2
(13.1)
40.3
(15.9)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
36.5
(14.4)
2.2
(0.9)
33.3
(13.1)
40.4
(15.9)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
36.8
(14.5)
2.2
(0.9)
32.4
(12.8)
40.0
(15.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
37.1
(14.6)
2.2
(0.9)
33.5
(13.2)
40.7
(16.0)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
34.9
(13.7)
2.6
(1.0)
30.6
(12.0)
39.2
(15.4)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-45
Definition:
Application ;
SCYE CIRCUMFERENCE
The circumference of the scye, pass-
ing through the axilla over the an-
terior and posterior vertical scye
landmarks and over the acromial land-
mark. The subject stands erect, look-
ing straight ahead, with the right
arm slightly abducted.
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Sub i .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
5% lie
tics"
95%ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
37.1
(14.6)
2.3
(0.9)
33.6
(13.2)
41.1
(16.2)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
39.8
(15.7)
3.3
(1.3)
35.2
(13.9)
45.9
(18.1)
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
48.4
(19.1)
2.8
(1.1)
43.8
(17.2)
53.0
(20.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
53
28-43
45.8
(18.0)
2.0
(0.8)
42.9
(16.9)
49.2
(19.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
44.8
(17.6)
2.5
(1.0)
40.8 '
(16.1)
49.0
(19.3)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
43.3
(17.0)
2.1
(0.8)
39.9
(15.7)
47.0
(18.5)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
45.9
(18.1)
3.6
(1.4)
40.4
(15.9)
52.2
(20.6)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-46
Definition:
BICEPS CIRCUMFERENCE, FLEXED
The circumference of the arm at the
level of the biceps landmark. The
subject stands with his elbow bent at
90 degrees and the biceps maximally
flexed.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics-
957aie
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
26.8
(10.6)
2.3
(0.9)
23.3
( 9.2)
30.8
(12.1)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
32.7
(12.9)
2.3
(0.9)
29.1
(11.5)
36.6
(14.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
56
28-43
33.3
(13.1)
1.8
(0.7)
30.8
(12.1)
36.9
(14.5)
, RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
196C
1342
18-59
31.0
(12.2)
2.1
(0.8)
27.8
(10.9)
:54.8
(13.7)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
31.9
(12.6)
2.0
(0.8)
28.3
(11.1)
35.1
(13.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
32.2
(12.7)
2.2
(0.9)
28.6
(11.3)
35.^
(14.1)
Japanese
Civ.
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-47
Definition
Application :
BICEPS CIRCUMFERENCE, RELAXED
The circumference of the arm at the
level of the biceps landmark. The
subject stands with his arm slightly
abducted.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
San^le &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
De
X
scriptii
SD
/e Statisl
57.il e
:ics*
957.il e
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
25.6
(10.1)
2.3
(0.9)
22.2
( 8.7)
29.7
(11.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
1960-62
1165
25-40
28.1
(11.1)
4.2
(1.7)
22.6
( 8.9)
36.4
(14.3)
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
28.6
(11.3)
3.2
(1.3)
24.1
( 9.5)
34.5
(13.6)
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
27.7
(10.9)
3.0
(1.2)
22.8
( 9.0)
32.5
(12.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1622
25-39
26.7
(10.5)
2.5
(1.0)
22.6
( 8.9)
30.8
(12.1)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
30.8
(12.1)
2.3
(0.9)
27.0
(10.6)
34.7
(13.7)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
29.3
(11.5)
2.2
(0.9)
26.0
(10.2)
33.0
(13.0)
French
Fliers
1573
65
27-32
29.5
(11.6)
2.0
26.0
(10.2)
33.1
(13.0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
29.3
(11.5)
2.0
(0.8)
25.9
(10.2)
32.7
n?.9)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
27.5
(10.8)
2.4
(0.9)
23.6
( 9.3)
31.4
(12.4)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-48
FOREARM CIRCUMFERENCE, FLEXED
Definition ; The circumference of the arm at the
level of the forearm landmark. The
subject stands with his upper arm
raised so that its long axis is
horizontal, elbow flexed 90 degrees
and fist tightly clenched.
Application ; Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Des
X
criptive
SD
Statist
57oile
.ics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
25.0
( 9.8)
1.5
(0.6)
22.6
( 8.9)
27.5
(10.8)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
29.8
(11.7)
1.6
(0.6)
27.2
(10.7)
32.4
(12.8)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
55
28-43
29.2
(11.5)
1.6
(0.6)
26.6
(10.5)
31.7
(12.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
29.0
(11.4)
1.6
(0.6)
26.4
(10.4)
31.7
(12.5)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
28.2
(11.1)
1.1
(0.4)
26.3
(10.4)
29.8
(11.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
29.5
(11.6)
2.0
(0.8)
26.3
(10.4)
32.9
(13.0)
Japanese
Civ.
'•Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-49
WRIST CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition ; The minimum circumference of the
wrist at the level of the stylion
landmark. The subject stands with the
arm slightly abducted.
Application ; Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statistics-
5%ile 957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
15.0
( 5.9)
0.7
(0.3)
13.8
( 5.4)
16.2
( 6.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
215
20-49
16.3
( 6.4)
0.9
(0.4)
14.8
( 5.8)
17.7
( 7.0)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
17.6
( 6.9)
0.9
(0.4)
16.2
( 6.4)
19.2
( 7.6)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
57
28-43
17.3
( 6.8)
0.8
(0.3)
16.0
( 6.3)
18.7
( 7.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1999
18-45
17.4
( 6.9)
1.0
(0.4)
15.9
( 6.3)
19.1
( 7.5)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
17.4
( 6.9)
0.9
(0.4)
16.0
( 6.3)
18.9
( 7.4)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
16.9
( 6.7)
0.8
(0.3)
15.8
( 6.2)
18.5
( 7.3)
German AF
1975
1005
Not
Reported
17.8
( 7.0)
0.9
(0.4)
16.4
( 6.5)
19.4
( 7.6)
Japanese
Civ.
'^'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-50
Definition:
Application ;
VERTICAL TRUNK CIRCUMFERENCE
The circumference of the trunk mea-
sured by passing a tape between the
legs, over the protrusion of the
right buttock, and up the back to lie
over the midshoulder landmark. The
other end of the tape is brought
up over the right nipple to the
midshoulder landmark. The subject
stands with the legs slightly apart.
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Equipment design: length of straps
and webbing for restraint systems and
rigging.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
:ics-''
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
154.4
(60.8)
6.9
(2.7)
143.5
(56.5)
166.3
(65.5)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
147.7
(58.1)
5.9
(2.3)
138.0
(54.3)
157.4
(62.0)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
168.1
(66.2)
7.2
(2.8)
156.7
(61.7)
180.2
(70.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
58
28-43
168.4
(66.3)
7.1
(2.8)
157.6
(62.0)
181.0
(71.3)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
162.5
(64.0)
6.6
(2.6)
151.8
(59.8)
173.4
(68.3)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
160.5
(63.2)
6.3
(2.5)
150.5
(59.3)
171.2
(67.4)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
159.5
(62.8)
6.4
(2.5)
149.7
(58.9)
169.2
(66.6)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
165.5
(65.2)
6.9
(2.7)
154.7
(60.9)
177.4
(69.8)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
158.9
(62.6)
7.4
(2.9)
146.7
(57.8)
171.1
(67.4)
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-51
SPINE-TO-WRIST LENGTH (SLEEVE LENGTH)
Definition ; The surface distance from the spine
to the wrist landmark. The subject
stands, arms horizontal, elbows flex-
ed about 60 degrees, fists clenched
and touching, and shoulders relaxed.
Application : Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Des
X
criptive
SD
i Statist
5%ile
:ics*
95%ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
79.6
(31.3)
3.3
(1.3)
74.2
(29.2)
85.1
(33.5)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
68.7
(27.0)
2.5
(1.0)
64.6
(25.4)
72.8
(28.7)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
90.8
(35.7)
3.5
(1.4)
85.2
(33.5)
96.8
(38.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
85.3
(33.6)
3.5
(1.4)
79.6
(31.3)
91.1
(35.9)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
86.6
(34.1)
2.8
(1.1)
82.1
(32.3)
90.7
(35.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
87.4
(34.4)
3.8
(1.5)
81.2
(32.0)
93.7
(36.9)
Japanese
Civ.
1968-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
74.6
(29.4)
2.9
(1.1)
69.8
(27.5)
79.4
(31.3)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-52
WAIST FRONT
Definition ; The surface distance from the supra-
sternale landmark to the anterior
waist landmark. The subject stands
erect, looking straight ahead.
Application ; Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Equipment design: length of personal
equipment to be worn on the torso
such as respirator packs and rigid
body armor.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
40.4
(15.9)
2.2
(0.9)
36.9
(14.5)
44.2
(17.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
50
28-43
38.2
(15.0)
2.6
(1.0)
34.4
(13.5)
(16.7)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
38.9
(15.3)
2.0
(0.8)
35.9
(14.1)
42.5
(16.7)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
39.0
(15.4)
2.1
(0.8)
35.8
(14.1)
42.7
(16.8)
Japanese
Civ.
'>Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
III-53
WAIST BACK
Definition ; The surface distance along the spine
from the cervicale landmark to the
posterior waist landmark. The subject
stands erect, with his head in the
Frankfort plane.
Application : Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Equipment design: length of personal
equipment to be worn on the torso
such as respirator packs and rigid
body armor.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
40.5
(15.9)
2.2
(0.9)
37.0
(14.6)
44.3
(17.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4995
18-55+
38.0
(15.0)
2.3
(0.9)
34.2
(13.5)
41.9
(16.5)
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
37.7
(14.8)
1.7
(0.7)
34.9
(13.7)
40.5
(15.9)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
46.9
(18.5)
2.4
(0.9)
43.1
(17.0)
50.9
(20.0)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
50
28-43
46.6
(18.3)
2.2
(0.9)
43.5
(17.1)
50.5
(19.9)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
45.5
(17.9)
2.2
(0.9)
41.7
(16.4)
49.1
(19.3)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
45.6
(18.0)
2.6
(].o)
41.3
(16.3)
50.1
(19.7)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
46.0
(18.1)
2.5
(1.0)
41.9
(16.5)
50.1
(19.7)
'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-54
Definition:
Application :
SHOULDER LENGTH
The surface distance along the top
of the shoulder from the right later-
al neck landmark to the right acromial
landmark. The subject stands erect,
looking straight ahead.
Sizing of clothing and body personal
protective equipment;
Equipment design: width of webbing
and straps of restraint systems and
suspension for packs and harnesses.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptivc
SD
; Statist
57oile
ics^''-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
14.7
( 5.8)
1.0
(0.4)
13.0
( 5.1)
16.4
( 6.5)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
16.6
( 6.5)
1.3
(0.5)
14.6
( 5.7)
18.7
( 7.4)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
16.8
( 6.6)
1.2
(0.5)
14.9
( 5.9)
18.6
( 7.3)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
14.2
( 5.6)
1.7
(0.7)
11.2
( 4.4)
16.7
( 6.6)
Japanese
Civ.
•Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-55
INTERSCYE
Definition ; The horizontal distance across the
back between the posterior scye point
landmarks. The subject stands erect
with the arms relaxed.
Application : Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57cile
tics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
35.1
(13.8)
2.4
(0.9)
31.2
(12.3)
39.2
(15.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
1957
4994
18-55+
33.9
(13.3)
2.9
(1.1)
29.4
(11.6)
38.9
(15.3)
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
38.8
(15.3)
3.8
(1.5)
32.5
(12.8)
45.0
(17.7)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
52
28-43
36.4
(14.3)
2.3
(0.9)
32.6
(12.8)
40.2
(15.8)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
39.4
(15.5)
2.6
(1.0)
35.3
(13.9)
44.1
(17.4)
French
Fliers
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
43.3
(17.0)
3.8
(1.5)
37.1
(14.6)
49.6
(19.5)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-56
HEAD LENGTH
Definition ; The maximum length of the head
between the glabella and the
occiput in the midsagittal
plane.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and person-
al protective equipment;
Equipment design; protective
head gear and equipment suspen-
sion systems for head and face.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_ I
X
)escript
SD
ive Stati
57oile
sties*
957.il e
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
18.4
( 7.2)
0.7
(0.3)
17.3
( 6.8)
19.5
(7.7)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
19.9
( 7.8)
0.7
(0.3)
18.8
( 7.4)
21.0
( 8.3)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
28
28-43
20.0
( 7.9)
0.5
(0.2)
19.2
( 7.6)
20.8
( 8.2)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
19.9
( 7.8)
0.6
(0.2)
18.8
( 7.4)
20.9
( 8.2)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
19.3
( 7.6)
0.7
(0.3)
18.2
( 7.3)
20.4
( 8.0)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
19.5
( 7.7)
0.6
(0.2)
18.6
( 7.2)
20.5
( 8.1)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
19.2
( 7.6)
0.8
(0.3)
17.7
( 7.0)
20.4
( 8.0)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-57
Definition:
Application ;
HEAD BREADTH
The maximum horizontal breadth
of the head above the level of
the ears.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and person-
al protective equipment;
Equipment design: protective
head gear and equipment su-
spension systems for head and
face.
S amp 1 e &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_Des
X
criptive
SD
; Statist
57oile
ics*
957<,ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
14.5
( 5.7)
0.6
(0.2)
13.5
( 5.3)
15.5
( 6.1)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
15.6
( 6.1)
0.5
(0.2)
14.7
( 5.8)
16.5
( 6.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
28
28-43
15.6
( 6.1)
0.6
(0.2)
14.6
( 5.7)
16.6
( 6.5)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
15.8
( 6.2)
0.5
(0.2)
14.9
( 5.9)
16.6
( 6.5)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
15.5
( 6.1)
0.6
(0.2)
14.6
( 5.7)
16.5
( 6.5)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
15.4
( 6.1)
0.5
(0.2)
14.6
( 5.7)
16.2
( 6.4)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
15.7
( 6.2)
0.6
(0.2)
14.7
( 5.8)
16.7
( 6.6)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-58
HEAD CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition ; The maximum circumference of
the head passing above the
brow ridges.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and person-
al protective equipment;
Equipment design; protective
head gear and equipment su-
spension systems for head and
face.
Sample &
Reference
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
French
Fliers
German AF
Japanese
Civ.
Survey
Date
1968
No. of
Subj .
1905
1967-68
1972-73
1967
Dates
Vary
1970-71
1960
1973
1975
1967-68
1972-73
1622
2420
57
2000
1342
65
1004
1870
Age
Range
18-56
25-39
21-50
2 8-43
18-45
18-59
27-32
Not
Reported
25-39
_Descriptive Statistics"
X SD 57<.ile 957oile
54.9
(21.6)
54.5
(21.5)
57.5
(22.6)
57.6
(22.7)
57.7
(22.7)
56.5
(22.2)
56.8
(22.4)
57.0
(22.4)
56.5
(22.2)
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
1.6
(0.6)
52.3
(20.6)
1.4
(0.6)
1.4
(0.6)
1.3
(0.5)
1.4
(0.6)
1.4
(0.6)
1.5
(0.6)
1.4
(0.6)
1.5
(0.6)
52.2
(20.6)
55.2
(21.7)
55.3
(21.8)
55.5
(21.9)
54.2
(21.3)
54.5
(21.5)
54.7
(21.5)
54.0
(21.3)
57.6
(22.7)
56.8
(22.4)
59.9
(23.6)
59.7
(23.5)
59.9
(23.6)
58.8
(23.1)
59.2
(23.3)
59.5
(23.4)
59.0
(23.2)
III-59
Definition:
Application ;
HAND LENGTH
The distance from the wrist
landmark to dactyl ion. The sub-
ject sits with the hand flat
on a table, palm up, with
fingers together and straight.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and person-
al protective equipment;
Body linkage and models.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_Des
X
cripti\
SD
re Statist
57c.ile
ics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
18.4
( 7.2)
1.0
(0.4)
16.9
( 6.7)
20.1
( 7.9)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
162
20-49
17.9
( 7.0)
1.0
(0.4)
16.3
C 6.4')
19.6
( 7.7)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
19.1
( 7.5)
0.8
(0.3)
17.8
( 7.0)
20.5
( 8.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
25
28-43
19.0
( 7.5)
1.3
(0.5)
16.9
( 6.7)
21.1
( 8.3)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
19.0
( 7.5)
0.9
(0.4)
17.6
( 6.9)
20.4
( 8.0)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
19.2
( 7.6)
0.8
(0.3)
17.7
( 7.0)
20.4
( 8.0)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
18.9
( 7.4)
0.9
(0.4)
17.4
( 6.9)
20.3
( 8.0)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-60
Definition:
Application ;
HAND BREADTH
The breadth of the hand between meta-
carpal-phalangeal joints II and V.
The subject sits with the hand flat
on a table, palm down, with the
fingers together and straight.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and body personal
protective equipment;
Equipment design: width of grasping
surface for controls, handholds, and
handles.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
Des
X
criptive
SD
Statist
57oile
ics-'-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
7.6
( 3.0)
0.4
(0.2)
6.9
( 2.7)
8.2
( 3.2)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
214
20-49
7.7
( 3.0)
0.4
(0.2)
7.1
( 2.8)
8.3
(3.3)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
8.9
( 3.5)
0.4
(0.2)
8.2
( 3.2)
9.6
(3.8)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Pprsonnpl
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
8.9
( 3.5)
0.4
(0.2)
8.2
( 3.2)
9.6
( 3.8)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
8.7
( 3.4)
0.4
(0.2)
8.1
( 3.2)
9.4
( 3.7)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
8.6
( 3.4)
0.4
(0.2)
7.9
( 3.1)
9.3
( 3.7)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-61
Definition:
Application :
HAND CIRCUMFERENCE
The circumference of the hand passing
over the metacarpal-phalangeal joints
II and V. The subject sits with
the hand flat on a table, palm down,
fingers extended, and thumb abducted.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
Des
X
criptiv
SD
e Statist
5%ile
ics"
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
18.3
( 7.2)
0.9
(0.4)
16.8
( 6.6)
19.8
( 7.8)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
21.6
( 8.5)
0.9
(0.4)
20.0
( 7.9)
23.1
( 9.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
33
28-43
21.2
( 8.3)
3.0
(1.2)
16.2
( 6.4)
26.2
(10.3)
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
21.6
( 8.5)
1.0
(0.4)
20.0
( 7.9)
23.2
( 9.1)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
21.7
( 8.5)
1.0
(0.4)
20.2
( 8.0)
23.4
( 9.2)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
21.3
( 8.4)
1.3
(0.5)
19.1
( 7.5)
23.5
( 9.3)
Japanese
Civ.
■Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses
III-62
FOOT LENGTH
Definition : The distance, parallel to the long
axis of the foot, from the back
of the heel to the tip of the most
protruding toe. The subject stands
with weight equally distributed on
both feet.
Application ;
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout;
Body linkage and mo-dels.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57oile
tics"-
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
24.1
( 9.5)
1.1
(0.4)
22.2
( 8.7)
26.0
(10.2)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
210
20-49
24.6
( 9.7)
1.1
(0.4)
22.8
( 9.0)
26.3
(10.4)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1622
25-39
22.6
( 8.9)
0.9
(0.4)
21.1
( 8.3)
24.1
( 9.5)
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
27.0
(10.6)
1.2
(0.5)
25.1
( 9.9)
29.1
(11.5)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
26.6
(10.5)
1.2
(0.5)
24.7
( 9.7)
28.6
(11.3)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
26.5
(10.4)
1.1
(0.4)
24.6
( 9.7)
28.4
(11.2)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
26.5
(10.4)
1.1
(0.4)
24.7
( 9.7)
28.5
(11.2)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
26.4
(10.4)
1.2
(0.5)
24.5
( 9.6)
28.5
(11.2)
Japanese
Civ.
1967-68
1972-73
1870
25-39
24.4
( 9.6)
1.0
(0.4)
22.8
( 9.0)
26.0
(10.2)
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-63
Definition:
Application ;
FOOT BREADTH
The maximum horizontal distance a-
cross the foot, at right angles to
the long axis. The subject stands
with weight equally distributed on
both feet.
General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment;
Workspace layout.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statist
57oile
-ics*
957,ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
8.9
( 3.5)
0.5
(0.2)
8.0
( 3.1)
9.8
( 3.9)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
1968
210
20-49
9.5
( 3.7)
0.7
(0.3)
8.4
( 3.3)
10.5
( 4.1)
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
9.8
( 3.9)
0.5
(0.2)
9.0
( 3.5)
10.6
( 4.2)
NASA Astro-
nauts
Dates
Vary
27
28-43
10.3
( 4.1)
0.5
(0.2)
9.5
( 3.7)
11.1
( 4.4)
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
1998
18-45
9.5
( 3.7)
0.4
(0.2)
8.8
( 3.5)
10.3
( 4.1)
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
10.2
( 4.0)
0.5
(0.2)
9.4
( 3.7)
11.0
( 4.3)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
10.3
( 4.1)
0.5
(0.2)
9.5
( 3.7)
11.3
( 4.4)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
10.1
( 4.0)
0.6
(0.2)
9.2
( 3.6)
11.0
( 4.3)
Japanese
Civ.
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-64
BALL OP POOT CIRCUMFERENCE
Definition ; The circumference of the foot over
the distal ends of the metatarsal
bones. The subject stands with his
feet slightly apart and weight dis-
tributed equally on both feet.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and personal pro-
tective equipment.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
57,ile
;tics*
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
24.8
( 9.8)
1.2
(0.5)
22.9
( 9.0)
27.0
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
1970-71
2000
18-45
25.0
( q.a'*
1.2
(■0.5-)
23.1
( 9.n
27.0
Cm. 6")
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
25.2
( 9.9)
1.2
(0.5^
23.2
( 9.n
27.1
(in. 7^
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
25.2
( 9.9)
1.2
(0.5)
23.0
( 9.1)
27.0
(10.6)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
25.0
( 9.8)
1.3
(0.5)
22.9
( 9.0^
27.2
(10.7)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-65
MENTON-SELLION (FACE) LENGTH
Definition ; The distance from the menton
landmark to the deepest point
of the nasal root depression.
The subject sits with mouth
closed and jaw relaxed.
Application : General body description;
Sizing of clothing and per-
sonal protective equipment;
Equipment design: length of
oral-nasal oxygen mask and
respirator face pieces.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi .
Age
Range
_De£
X
;criptiv«
SD
; Statisi
57oile
:ics'^
957oile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
10.6
( 4.2)
0.6
(0.2)
9.6
( 3.8)
11.7
( 4.6)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
12.0
( 4.7)
0.6
(0.2)
11.0
( 4.3)
13.0
( 5.1)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
11.9
( 4.7)
0.6
(0.2)
11.0
( 4.3)
12.9
( 5.1)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
12.7
( 5.0)
0.6
(0.2)
11.8
( 4.6)
13.7
( 5. )
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
12.0
( 4.7)
0.7
(0.3)
10.9
( 4.3)
13.2
( 5.2)
Japanese
Civ.
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-66
BIZYGOMATIC (FACE) BREADTH
Definition ; The maximum horizontal breadth
of the face between the zygo-
matic arches.
Application ; General body description;
Sizing of clothing and person-
al protective equipment;
Equipment design: respirator
face pieces and face shields.
Sample &
Reference
Survey
Date
No. of
Subi.
Age
Range
De
X
scriptiv
SD
e Statis
5%ile
tics*
957<.ile
FEMALES
USAF Women
1968
1905
18-56
12.9
( 5.1)
0.6
(0.2)
11.9
( 4.7)
13.8
( 5.4)
U.S. HEW
Civ.
British
Civ.
Swedish Civ.
Japanese
Civ.
MALES
USAF Flying
Personnel
1967
2420
21-50
14.2
( 5.6)
0.5
(0.2)
13.4
( 5.3)
15.1
( 5.9)
NASA Astro-
nauts
RAF Flying
Personnel
Italian
Military
1960
1342
18-59
14.3
( 5.6)
0.5
(0.2)
13.5
( 5.3)
15.2
( 6.0)
French
Fliers
1973
65
27-32
14.2
( 5.6)
0.5
(0.2)
13.5
( 5.3)
14.8
( 5.8)
German AF
1975
1004
Not
Reported
13.3
( 5.2)
0.8
(0.3)
11.9
( 4.7)
14.7
( 5.8)
Japanese
Civ.
•Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-67
REFERENCES
Bolton, C. B., M. Kenward, R. E. Simpson, and G. M. Turner 1973. An
Anthropometric Survey of 2000 Royal Air Force Aircrew 1970/71 .
TR-73083, Royal Aircraft Establishment, Ministry of Defense,
Farnborough, Hants, England. (Also, AGARDograph No. 181, Dec.
1974.)
Chaffee, J, W. 1961. Andrometry: A Practical Application of Coordinate
Anthropometry in Human Engineering . Report FZY-012, Convair
Division of General Dynamics Corporation, Fort Worth, Tex.
Churchill, Edmund, Paul Kikta, and Thomas Churchill 1977. Intercorrela -
tions of Anthropometric Measurements: A Source Book for USA Data .
AMRL-TR-77-1, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Damon, Albert 1964. "Notes on Anthropometric Technique: I. Stature
Against a Wall and Standing Free," Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop . , 22:73-
78.
Garrett, John W. , and Kenneth W. Kennedy 1971. A Collation of Anthropo -
metry . AMRL-TR-68-1, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Hertzberg, H. T. E., G. S. Daniels, and Edmund Churchill 1954.
Anthropometry of Flying Personnel - 1950 . WADC-TR-52-321 , Wright
Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Hertzberg, H. T. E. 1968. "The Conference on Standardization of Anthro-
pometric Techniques and Terminology," Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop . ,
28(1):1-16.
Morant, G. M. , and J. C. Gilson 1945. A Report on a Survey of Body and
Clothing Measurement of Royal Air Force Personnel" FPRC 633 (a).
Royal Aircraft Establishment, Farnborough, Hants, England.
Papillault, G. 1906. "The International Agreement for the Unification
of Craniometric and Cephalometric Measurements," L' Anthropologie
17:559-572.
Randall, Francis E. , Albert Damon, Robert S. Benton, and Donald I. Patt
1946. Human Body Size in Military Aircraft and Personal
Equipment" AAF-TR-5501, Army Air Force, Wright Field, Dayton,
Ohio.
Stewart, T. D. , ed., 1947, Hrdlicka's Practical Anthropometry (3rd edi-
tion). The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology (Philadelphia,
Pa.).
Tanner, J. M. , J. Hiernaux, and Shirley Jarman 1969. "Growth and
Physique Studies," Human Biology, A Guide to Field Methods , J. S.
Wiener and J. A. Lourie, eds . , F. A. Davis Co. (Philadelphia,
Pa.).
III-68
Turner, G. M. 1974. Anthropometric Survey of 2000 RAF Aircrew, 1970/71
- Comparison of British and American Measuring Techniques . FPRC
556 , Royal Air Force Institute of Aviation Medicine, Farnborough ,
Hants, England.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Herron, R. E. 1972. "Biostereometric Measurement of Body Form," Year -
book of Physical Anthropology , 16:80-121.
III-69
APPENDIX A
A GLOSSARY OF ANATOMICAL AND ANTHROPOMETRIC TERMS
abdominal extension level -- the most anterior point on the curve of the
abdomen in the midsagittal plane.
abduct -- to move away from the axis of the body or one of its parts.
acromion -- the most lateral point of the lateral edge of the spine of the
scapula. Acromial height is usually equated with shoulder height.
anterior -- pertaining to the front of the body; as opposed to posterior.
auricular -- pertaining to the external ear.
axilla -- the armpit.
B
bi -- a prefix denoting connection with or relation to each of two symmetri-
cally paired parts.
biceps brachii -- the large muscle on the anterior surface of the upper arm.
biceps femoris -- a large posterior muscle of the thigh.
brow ridges — the bony ridges of the forehead that lie above the orbits
of the eye.
bustpoint -- the most anterior protrusion of the right bra pocket.
buttock protrusion -- the maximum posterior protrusion of the right buttock.
C
calcaneus -- the heel bone.
canthus -- a corner or angle formed by the meeting of the eyelids.
carpus -- the wristbones, collectively.
cervicale -- the protrusion of the spinal column at the base of the neck
caused by the tip of the spine (q.v.) of the 7th cervical vertebra.
Ill- 70
cheilion -- the corners of the mouth formed by the juncture of the lips.
coronal plane -- any vertical plane at right angles to the midsagittal plane,
crinion -- the point in the midplane where the hairline meets the forehead,
cutaneous lip -- the area between the upper lip and the nose.
D
dactylion — the tip of the middle finger.
deltoid muscle -- the large muscle on the lateral border of the upper arm
in the shoulder region.
distal -- the end of a body segment farthest from the head, as opposed to
proximal.
ectocanthus (also external canthus) -- the outside corner or angle formed
by the meeting of the eyelids.
endocanthus -- the inside corner or angle formed by the meeting of the eye-
lids.
epicondyle -- the bony eminence at the distal end of the humerus, radius,
and f emur .
extend -- to move adjacent segments so that the angle between them is in-
creased, as when the leg is straightened; as opposed to flex.
external -- away from the central long axis of the body; the outer jxirtion
of a body segment.
femoral epicondyles -- the bony projections on either side of the distal
end of the femur.
femur -- the thigh bone.
flex -- to move a joint in such a direction as to bring together the two
parts which it connects, as when the elbow is bent; as opposed to extend.
fossa -- a depression, usually somewhat longitudinal in shape, in the sur-
face of a part, as in a bone.
III-71
Frankfort plane -- the standard horizontal plane or orientation of the head.
The plane is established by a line passing through the right tragion (ap-
proximate earhole) and the lowest point of the right orbit (eye socket).
G
gastrocnemius -- the largest muscle in the calf of the leg.
glabella -- the most anterior point of the forehead between the brow ridges
in the midsagittal plane.
gluteal furrow -- the furrow at the juncture of the buttock and the thigh.
gonial angle -- the angle at the back of the lower jaw formed by the inter-
section of the vertical and horizontal portions of the jaw.
H
helix -- the rolled outer part of the ear.
humerus -- the bone of the upper arm.
humeral epicondyles -- the bony projections on either side of the distal
end of the humerus.
hyperextend -- to overextend a limb or other part of the body.
I
iliac crest -- the superior rim of the pelvic bone.
inferior -- below, in relation to another structure; lower.
inion -- the summit of the external occipital protuberance; the most poster-
ior bony protuberance on the back of the head.
inseam -- a term used in tailoring to indicate the inside length of a sleeve
or trouser leg. It is measured on the medial side of the arm or leg-
internal -- near the central long axis of the body; the inner portion of
a body segment.
interpupillary -- between the centers of the pupils of the eyes.
J-K
knuckle -- the joint formed by the meeting of a finger bone (phalanx) with
a palm bone (metacarpal).
Ill- 72
L
lateral -- lying near or toward the sides of the body; as opposed to medial,
lateral malleolus -- the lateral bony protrusion of the ankle.
larynx -- the cartilaginous box of the throat that houses the voice mechan-
ism. The "Adam's apple" is the most noticeable part of the larynx-
lip prominence -- the most anterior protrusion of either the upper or the
lower lip.
M
malleolus -- a rounded bony projection in the ankle region. There is one
on both the lateral and the medial side of the leg.
mandible -- the lower jaw.
mastoid process -- a bony projection on the inferior lateral surface of the
temporal bone behind the ear.
medial -- lying near or toward the midline of the body; as opposed to later-
al.
menton -- the point of the tip of the chin in the midsagittal plane.
metacarpal — pertaining to the long bones of the hand between the carpus
and the phalanges.
midaxillary line -- a vertical line passing through the center of the axilla.
midpatella -- a point one-half the distance between the superior and the
inferior margins of the right patella.
midsagittal plane -- the vertical plane which divides the body into right
and left halves.
midshoulder -- a point one-half the distance between the neck and the right
acromion.
N
nasal root depression -- the area of greatest indentation where the bridge
of the nose meets the forehead.
nasal septum -- the cartilaginous wall separating the right nostril from
the left.
III-73
navicular bone -- the small bone of the hand just distal to the bend of the
wrist on the thumb side.
nuchale -- the lowest point in the midsagittal plane of the occiput that
can be palpated among the muscles in the posterior- superior part of the
neck. This point is often visually obscured by hair.
ocular -- pertaining to the eye.
occipital bone -- a curved bone forming the back and part of the base of
the skull.
olecranon -- the proximal end of the ulna (the medial forearm bone).
omphalion -- the center point of the navel.
orbit -- the eye socket.
P
patella -- the kneecap.
phalanges -- the bones of the fingers and toes (singular, phalanx).
philtrum -- the vertical groove that runs from the upper lip to the base
of the nasal septum.
plantar - pertaining to the sole of the foot.
popliteal -- pertaining to the ligament behind the knee or to the part of
the leg back of the knee.
posterior -- pertaining to the back of the body; as opposed to anterior.
pronasale -- the most anterior point on the nose.
proximal -- the end of a body segment nearest the head; as opposed to distal.
radiale -- the uppermost point on the lateral margin of the proximal end
of the radius.
radius -- the bone of the forearm on the thumb side of the arm.
ramus -- the vertical portion of the lower jaw bone (mandible) .
Ill- 74
sagittal -- pertaining to the anteroposterior median plane of the body, or
to a plane parallel to the median.
scapula -- the shoulder blade.
scye -- a tailoring term to designate the armhole of a garment. Refers here
to landmarks which approximate the lower level of the axilla.
sellion -- the point of greatest indentation of the nasal root depression.
septum -- a dividing wall between two cavities; the nasal septum is the
fleshly partition between the two nasal cavities.
sphyrion -- the most distal extension of the tibia on the medial side of
the foot.
spine (or spinal process) of vertebrae -- the posterior prominences of the
vertebrae.
sternum — the breastbone.
stomion -- the point of contact in the midsagittal plane between the upper
and lower lip.
stylion -- the -most distal point on the styloid process of the radius.
styloid process — a long, spinelike projection of a bone.
sub -- a prefix designating below or under.
submandibular -- below the mandible or lower jaw.
subnasale -- the point where the base of the nasal septum meets the philtrum,
substernale -- the point located at the middle of the lower edge of the
breastbone.
superior -- above, in relation to another structure; higher.
supra -- prefix designating above or on.
suprasternale -- the lowest point in the notch in the upper edge of the
breastbone.
surface distance — a measurement that follows the general contours of the
surface of the body.
III-75
tarsus -- the collection of bones in the ankle joint, at the distal end of
the tibia.
temporal crest -- a narrow bony ridge along the side of the head above the
ear level that serves as a point of attachment for the temporal muscles.
temporal muscles -- the muscles of the temple region.
thyroid cartilage -- the bulge of the cartilage on the anterior surface of
the throat; in men, the Adam's apple.
tibia -- the medial bone of the leg (shin bone).
tibiale -- the uppermost point of the medial margin of the tibia.
tragion -- the point located at the notch just above the tragus of the ear.
trapezius muscle -- the large muscle on each side of the back of the neck
and shoulders, the action of which moves the shoulders.
triceps -- the muscle mass of the posterior upper arm.
trochanterion — the tip of the bony lateral protrusion of the proximal end
o f the femur .
U
ulna -- one of the bones of the forearm on the little finger side of the
arm.
vertex -- the top of the head.
W-X-Y-Z
zygomatic arch -- the bony arch below the orbit of the skull extending hori-
zontally along the side of the head from the cheekbone (the zygomatic
bone) nearly to the external ear.
111-76
ILLUSTRATED GLOSSARY
III-77
Lateral '--.. Medial
Lateral
Posterior
Anterior
Superior
Inferior
Figure 1. Anatomical planes and orientations.
78
ACROMION
HUMERUS
RAD I ALE
ULNA
RADIUS
RADIAL STYLION
SPHYRION
SUPRASTERNALE
STERNUM
DELTOID MUSCLE
AXILLA
SUBSTERNALE
TROCHANTERION
ULNAR STYLION
TIBIALE
FIBULA
Figure 2. Anatomical and anthropometric landmarks.
III-79
CERVICALE
SCAPULA
BUTTOCK PROTRUSION
GLUTEAL FURROW
BICEPS FEMORIS
POPLITEAL
GASTROCNEMIUS
TARSUS
CALCANEUS
PHALANGES
METACARPALES
CARPUS
THYROID CARTILAGE
BICEPS BRACHII
OLECRANON
SPHYRION
METATARSALS
PHALANGES
Figure 3. Anatomical and anthropometric landmarks,
III-80
ENDOCANTHUS
PHILTRUM
CHEILION
ECTOCANTHUS
ZYGOMATIC ARCH
STOMION
Figure 4. Anthropometric landmarks of the head and face.
III-81
00
o
o
O
*-> c
o o
o —
0£. c/l
\r\
•— <u
(T3 S-
(/) Q.
>o a>
z o
LlJ
LlJ
_l
_l
z
<£
<:
z
o
OO
l>0
o
«I
<c
•— 1
_J
z
z
s:
_l
o
CO
o
LU
q:
=3
(—
OO
o.
l/l
oo
C3
Z
o
C3
o
c
s-
<o
E
■o
>a
u
•I—
i~
^->
<u
E
o
a.
o
i-
c
can
UJ
UJ
z
r^
I
OO
LlJ
Z
_l
o
o
o
I/O
_i
o
cC
cc
LlJ
CO
CO
i:
z
o
<
o
*—•
<_3
c£
o
Q
—J
■=>
q:
o
o:
z
<I
Z
1—
»— •
a.
•a:
1—
1—
2:
o
o.
y
■—1
1— ■
O
o
o
ts
1—
o
>-
oo
o
r~vi
<:
III-82
APPENDIX B
PROJECTED 1985 BODY SIZE DATA
III-83
PROJECTED 1985 BODY SIZE DATA
As man/machine systems become increasingly more complex, the research
and development cycle from concept to ultimate end product is continually
lengthened. The more complex the system, the more time is involved in the
establishment of system requirements and design parameters, mock up, proto-
type fabrication, testing and evaluation prior to the production of the
system. This research and development cycle can become so lengthy that the
anticipated users of a particular system such as a fighter aircraft, for
example, may still be adolecents at the time the basic system requirements
are being established. The designer must therefore think in terms of the
requirements of users projected five to 15 years in the future.
In Chapter II, sources of human body size variability are described
and quantified. There, particular attention was paid to secular changes
in the body size of populations over time. To relieve the NASA design engin-
eer of the burden of extrapolating data to the 1980-1990 time frame, the
following anthropometric data have been developed for selected body dimen-
sions projected to 1985. The dimensions chosen for inclusion here are the
same 59 variables charted in the main body of this chapter and were selec-
ted for their general all-around usefulness to NASA engineers.
The male extrapolations were made on the basis of data from a number
of surveys of USAF and U.S. Navy flying personnel conducted between 1950
and 1973. The data used were restricted to those from coimiissioned officers
in the 23-35 year age range. Estimates were made for stature and for weight
for astronauts aged 35 in 1985; estimates for other bodily dimensions were
then computed by modifying the USAF '67 flying personnel data to reflect
the anticipated increases in stature and weight.
Stature was assumed to be solely dependent on year of birth and statis-
tics for stature were computed, year by year, for men born in each year
from 1915 to 1950. Regression lines fitted to the means, 5th percentiles
and 95th percentiles of these data suggested a continuing increase in all
three statistics of about 8 mm (1/3 inch) per decade. Since the men who
will be 35 years old in 1985 were born in 1950, 12-13 years later than the
average member of the '67 flying personnel survey, an increase of about
one centimeter (0.4 inch) was postulated.
Weight was considered as being primarily related to age and, for pur-
poses of projection, it was assumed that the ponderal index (stature divided
by the cube root of weight) was independent of birth year but was a linear
function of age. On this basis, a value for the ponderal index for men of
35 was derived. The projected weight was then established by determining
the weight which, with the anticipated 1985 stature, corresponded to this
III-84
index- Unlike the values of stature, the projected increases in weight in-
creased substantially from the low end to the high end of the body size
distribution: 5th 7oile, 1.6 kg (3.5 lb); 10th7oile, 1.7 kg (3.7 lb); mean,
1.9 kg (4.2 lb); 90th 7oile, 2.1 kg (4.6 lb); 95th 7,ile, 2.2 kg (4.9 lb).
Because no correspondingly large group of surveys on which to study
secular changes in the dimensions of female officers exists and because
of the small size of the changes in the men's values, the data for the offi-
cers' subseries measured in the 1968 Air Torce Women' s survey have been
accepted as the most satisfactory basis from which estimates were made.
III-85
1985 MALE^
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
957oile
805
Stature
168.2
(66.2)
178.4
(70.2)
188.6
(74.3)
973
Wrist height
80.7
(31.8)
87.1
(34.3)
93.9
(37.0)
64
Ankle height
12.1
(4.8)
13.8
(5.4)
15.8
(6.2)
309
Elbow height
105.5
(41.5)
113.0
(44.5)
120.9
(47.6)
236
Chest depth
21.5
(8.5)
24.6
(9.7)
27.8
(10.9)
916
Vertical trunk circumference
157.4
(62.0)
169.0
(66.5)
180.9
(71.2)
612
Midshoulder height, sitting
60.6
(23.9)
65.0
(25.6)
69.6
(27.4)
459
Hip breadth, sitting
34.4
(13.5)
38.1
(15.0)
42.2
(16.6)
921
Waist back
43.3
(17.0)
47.2
(18.6)
51.1
(20.1)
506
Interscye
32.6
(12.8)
38.9
(15.3)
45.2
(17.8)
639
Neck circumference
35.5
(14.0)
38.5
(15.2)
41.8
(16.5)
754
Shoulder length
14.7
(5.8)
16.7
(6.6)
18.9
(7.4)
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
111-86
1985 FEMALE*
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
957oile
805
Stature
152.3
(60.0)
162.8
(64.1)
172.8
(68.0)
973
Wrist height"*
73.5
(28.9)
79.4
(31.3)
85.3
(33.6)
64
Ankle height
9.1
(3.6)
11.2
(4.4)
13.6
(5.4)
309
Elbow height—-
96,5
(38.0)
102.6
(40.4)
108.7
(42.8)
169
Bust depth
21.1
(8.3)
24.2
(9.5)
28.2
(11.1)
916
Vertical trunk circumference
145.3
(57.2)
156.6
(61.7)
169.0
(66.5)
612
Midshoulder height, sitting
54.2
(21.3)
58.5
(23.0)
63.1
(24.8)
459
Hip breadth, sitting
35.4
(13.9)
38.5
(15.2)
41.6
(16.4)
921
Waist back
36.8
(14.5)
40.5
(15.9)
44.5
(17.5)
506
Interscye
31.4
(12.4)
35.6
(14.0)
39.9
(15.7)
639
Neck circumference
31.3
(12.3)
34.0
(13.4)
37.3
(14.7)
754
Shoulder length
13.1
(5.2)
14.7
(5.8)
16.5
(6.5)
"'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
■"Estimated from regression equations.
III-87
1985 MALE"
No.
Dimension
5%ile
Mean
957oile
758
Sitting height
88.5
(34.8)
93.6
(36.9)
99.0
(39.0)
330
Eye height, sitting
76.4
(30.1)
81.3
(32.0)
86.5
(34.1)
529
Knee height, sitting
52.1
(20.5)
56.1
(22.1)
60.3
(23.7)
678
Popliteal height
40.4
(15.9)
44.0
(17.3)
47.8
(18.8)
751
Shoulder-elbow length
33.3
(13.1)
36.1
(14.2)
38.9
(15.3)
194
Buttock-knee length
56.4
(22.2)
60.8
(23.9)
65.4
(25.7)
420
Hand length
17.9
(7.0)
19.2
(7.6)
20.6
(8.1)
411
Hand breadth
8.3
(3.3)
8.9
(3.5)
9.6
(3.8)
416
Hand circumference
20.1
(7.9)
21.6
(8.5)
23.2
(9.1)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
111-88
1985 FEMALE*
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
95%ile
758
Sitting height
81.2
(32.0)
86.2
(33.9)
91.5
(36.0)
330
Eye height, sitting
69.5
(27.4)
74.4
(29.3)
79.6
(31.3)
529
Knee height, sitting*"
46.7
(18.4)
50.5
(19.9)
54.3
(21.4)
678
Popliteal height
37.8
(14.9)
41.0
(16.1)
44.2
(17.4)
751
Shoulder-elbow length*-
30.6
(12.0)
33.2
(13.1)
35.8
(14.1)
194
Buttock-knee length
53.3
(21.0)
57.6
(22.7)
62.0
(24.4)
420
Hand length
17.0
(6.7)
18.4
(7.2)
20.1
(7.9)
411
Hand breadth
6.9
(2.7)
7.6
(3.0)
8.3
(3.3)
416
Hand circumference
16.7
(6.6)
18.3
(7.2)
19.9
(7.8)
"'•Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
'•"'•Estimated from regression equations.
III-89
1985 MALE^
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
y^/oiie
949
Waist height
99.4
(39.1)
107.2
(42.2)
114.8
(45.2)
249
Crotch height
78.9
(31.1)
85.7
(33.7)
92.6
(36.5)
215
Calf height
32.3
(12.7)
35.8
(14.1)
39.6
(15.6)
103
Biacromial breadth
37.6
(14.8)
40.9
(16.1)
44.0
(17.3)
946
Waist front
37.1
(14.6)
40.6
(16.0)
44.2
(17.4)
735
Scye circumference
44.2
(17.4)
48.7
(19.2)
53.3
(21.0)
178
Buttock circumference
90.3
(35.6)
99.5
(39.2)
108.9
(42.9)
312
Elbow rest height
21.0
(8.3)
25.3
(10.0)
29.7
(11.7)
856
Thigh clearance
14.5
(5.7)
16.8
(6.6)
19.1
(7.5)
381
Forearm-hand length""
45.7
(18.0)
49.1
(19.3)
52.6
(20.7)
200
Buttock-popliteal length
46.4
(18.3)
50.8
(20.0)
55.1
(21.7)
"Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses,
"""Estimated from regression equations.
111-90
1985 FEMALE*
.103
No.
Dimension
57„ile
Mean
957=,ile
949
Waist height
93.1
(36.7)
100.7
(39.6)
108.1
(42.6)
249
Crotch height
67.7
(26.7)
74.4
(29.3)
81.3
(32.0)
215
Calf height*"
28.7
(11.3)
33.1
(13.0)
37.5
(14.8)
103
Biacromial breadth
33.4
(13.1)
36.1
(14.2)
38.8
(15.3)
946
Waist front
30.4
(12.0)
33.7
(13.3)
37.1
(14.6)
735
Scye circumference
34.1
(13.4)
37.8
(14.9)
41.9
(16.5)
178
Buttock circumference
86.0
(33.9)
95.1
(37.4)
106.6
(42.0)
312
Elbow rest height
19.2
(7.6)
22.9
(9.0)
27.1
(10.7)
856
Thigh clearance
10.4
(4.1)
12.5
(4.9)
14.9
(5.9)
381
Forearm-hand length**
39.7
(15.6)
42.8
(16.9)
45.9
(18.1)
200
Buttock-popliteal length
43.7
(17.2)
47.9
(18.9)
52.7
(20.7)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
'^•Estimated from regression equations.
111-91
1985 MALE"
165
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
957oile
957
Weight (not pictured) kg.
(lbs.)
65.2
(143.7)
81.5
(179.7)
97.7
(215.4)
23
Acromial (shoulder) height
136.5
(53.7)
146.1
(57.5)
155.7
(61.3)
894
Trochanteric height
87.5
(34.4)
94.6
(37.2)
101.8
(40.1)
873
Tibiale height
44.8
(17.6)
48.9
(19.3)
53.0
(20.9)
122
Bideltoid (shoulder) breadth
44.4
(17.5)
48.6
(19.1)
52.9
(20.8)
223
Chest breadth
29.7
(11.7)
33.0
(13.0)
36.7
(14.4)
457
Hip breadth
32.5
(12.8)
35.5
(14.0)
38.8
(15.3)
165
Bizygomatic (face) breadth
13.4
(5.3)
14.3
(5.6)
15.1
(5.9)
kll
Head breadth
14.7
(5.8)
15.6
(6.1)
16.6
(0,5)
'•'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-92
1985 female-
No.
23
894
873
122
223
457
Dimension
957 Weight (not pictured) kg.
(lbs.)
Acromial (shoulder) height
Trochanteric height
Tibiale height
Bideltoid (shoulder) breadth
Chest breadth
Hip breadth"-'-
57oile
47.4
(104.5)
122.9
(48.4)
75.6
(29.8)
38.1
(15.0)
38.6
(15.2)
25.3
(10.0)
32.0
(3.9)
Mean
59.7
(131.6)
132.4
(52.1)
82.8
(32.6)
42.1
(16.6)
42.4
(16.7)
28.5
(11.2)
35.5
95°/oile
74.9
(165.1)
141.4
(55.7)
90.1
(35.5)
46.4
(18.3)
46.8
(18.4)
32.3
(12.7)
39.6
(4.6)
165
Bizygomatic (face) breadth
12.0
(4.7)
13.0
(5.1)
14.0
(5.5)
427
Head breadth
13.7
(5.4)
14.7
(5.8)
15.7
(6.2)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
*^-Estimated from regression equations.
III-93
1985 MALE*
369
No.
Dimension
57,ile
Mean
957oile
Ikl
Shoulder circumference
109.0
(42.9)
118.5
(46.7)
128.4
(50.6)
230
Chest circumference
89.1
(35.1)
99.1
(39.0)
109.8
(43.2)
931
Waist circumference
76.4
(30.1)
88.4
(34.8)
100.7
(39.6)
852
Thigh circumference
52.1
(20.5)
59.5
(23.4)
67.1
(26.4)
515
Knee circumference
35.6
(14.0)
39.0
(15.4)
42.7
(16.8)
207
Calf circumference
33.8
(13.3)
37.5
(14.8)
41.3
(16.3)
113
Biceps circumference, relaxed
27.2
(10.7)
31.1
(12.2)
35.0
(13.8)
967
Wrist circumference
16.2
(6.4)
17.6
(6.9)
19.3
(7.6)
HI
Biceps circumference, flexed
29.4
(11.6)
33.1
(13.0)
36.9
(14.5)
369
Forearm circumference, flexed
27.4
(10.8)
30.0
(11.8)
32.6
(12.8)
-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
1-94
(1
1985 FEMALE*
113
967
369
No.
Dimension
57„ile
Mean
957oile
lUl
Shoulder circumference
93.3
(36.7)
101.7
(40.0)
111.8
(44.0)
230
Chest circumference
82.2
(32.4)
91.6
(36.1)
103.6
(40.8)
931
Waist circumference
59.4
(23.4)
68.2
(26.9)
80.4
(31.7)
852
Thigh circumference
49.2
(19.4)
56.3
(22.2)
64.1
(25.2)
515
Knee circumference
33.0
(13.0)
36.7
(14.4)
41.1
(16.2)
207
Calf circumference
30.7
(12.1)
34.3
(13.5)
38.4
(15.1)
113
Biceps circumference, relaxed
22.8
(9.0)
26.3
(10.4)
30.9
(12.2)
967
Wrist circumference
13.8
(5.4)
15.0
(5.9)
16.3
(6.4)
111
Biceps circumference, flexed
23.9
(9.4)
27.5
(10.8)
32.0
(12.6)
369
Forearm circumference, flexed
22.7
(8.9)
25.2
(9.9)
27.8
(10.9)
•'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
III-95
1985 MALE^
362
586
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
957„ile
67
Thumb-tip reach
74.3
(29.3)
80.7
(31.8)
87.4
(34.4)
111
Sleeve length
85.7
(33.7)
91.3
(35.9)
97.3
(38.3)
441
Head length
18.8
(7.4)
19.9
(7.8)
21.0
(8.3)
430
Head circumference
55.3
(21.8)
57.6
(22.7)
60.0
(23.6)
586
Menton- sell ion (face) length
11.1
(4.4)
12.0
(4.7)
13.0
(5.1)
362
Foot length
25.3
(10.0)
27.2
(10.7)
29.2
(11.5)
356
Foot breadth
9.0
(3.5)
9.8
(3.9)
10.7
(4.2)
97
Ball of foot circumference
23.0
(9.1)
25.0
(9.8)
27.0
(10.6)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses-
III-96
1985 FEMALE*
586
362
No.
Dimension
57oile
Mean
957oile
67
Thumb-tip reach
67.7
(26.7)
74.3
(29.3)
80.6
(31.7)
772
Sleeve length
74.2
(29.2)
80.0
(31.5)
85.2
(33.5)
441
Head length
17.5
(6.9)
18.6
(7.3)
19.7
(7.8)
430
Head circumference
52.6
(20.7)
55.2
(21.7)
57.9
(22.8)
586
Menton-sellion (face) length
12.6
(9.8)
14.0
(10,8)
15.6
(11.8)
362
Foot length
22.2
(8.7)
24.1
(9.5)
26.1
(10.3)
356
Foot breadth
8.0
(3.1)
8.8
(3.5)
9.7
(3.8)
97
Ball of foot circumference'-'"'^
21.3
(8.4)
23.3
(9.2)
25.3
(10.0)
'-Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
^'Estimated from regression equations.
III-97
APPENDIX C
DRAWING BOARD MANIKINS
Two-dimensional drawing board manikins are among the most important
aids used by the designer in making preliminary as well as fairly complete
crew station drawings. The most up-to-date and accurate such manikins are
those developed by Kenneth W. Kennedy of the Aerospace Medical Research Lab-
oratory, Wright-Patterson Air Porce Base, Ohio. Acting on a request from
the Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, NASA, Kennedy developed a 5th, 50th and
95th percentile drawing board manikin based on the anticipated 1980-1990
body size distribution of USAF fliers. These manikins provide not only accur-
ate body size dimensions but body length links, segmental centers of rota-
tion and joint range limits. As well, they incorporate adjustments for
changes in body size dimensions for sitting and standing design postures.
Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the new manikins (patents applied for).
They are designed to represent the USAF rated officers of the 1980-90 time
period. Figure 1 is a photograph of one variation, the 5th percentile, with
the arm detached to permit an uncluttered view of its parts. Fifth, 50th, and
95th percentile manikins have been designed. A variant of the same manikin,
provided with a boot and helmet, is pictured in Figure 2 in the fetal
position to illustrate the manikin's mobility and natural body profile in
such an extreme position.
The manikins are accurate in at least 25 body size dimensions impor-
tant in the layout of crew stations. Chief among these are:
Stature
Sitting height
Eye height, sitting
Functional reach
Functional reach, extended
Elbow to grip distance
Buttock knee length
Knee height, sitting
Chest deoth
Waist depth
Hand, head and foot dimensions
Alternate limbs have been designed and sized to allow the designer
to consider variability in body proportions as well as body size in the de-
sign of crew stations. Each percentile torso is equipped with three sets
of limbs representing the design range. Thus, a 50th percentile manikin could
be fitted either with 50th percentile limbs or with a set of arms and legs
representing the largest or smallest generally found on that size torso.
III-98
Reproduced from
best available copy.
Figure 1. USAF two-dimensional manikin.
III-99
Figure 2. USAF two-dimensional manikin in
fetal position.
Reproduced from
best available copy.
III-lOO
The manikins are obviously useful in laying out the geometry of crew
stations. They are also valuable in evaluating a crew station in terms of
tolerance to G forces because they provide the capability to track the posi-
tions of the eye, the carotid sinuses, and the aortic valves. The heights
of the eye-heart and carotid sinus-heart columns can be calculated.
To provide the USAF manikin with the desired features and to provide
for realistic intra-torso mobility and the greatest possible stability on
the drawing board, it was necessary to design the manikin in three layers.
With this design, the head, torso, and legs on each side can be uniplanar.
Since the convention is to design cockpits and other vehicle driving stations
"face left," the symbology has been designed for that direction. The arm
is fastened to the manikin's left side. Should the occasion arise to design
face right, the arm can be removed and fastened to the other side.
The plans for this manikin are not simple, nor can useful models be
made, with cardboard and scissors. They require precise and rather skilled
care in their fabrication to assure the desired results. Although somewhat
expensive to fabricate, a well-made manikin is an extremely useful and valu-
able design tool. Plans may be obtained from:
6570 Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory
ATTN: Mr. Kenneth W. Kennedy
Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433
For the casual user and for the designer who does not need the full
capabilities of the more complicated USAF 2-D manikins, a simpler design
has been prepared and is presented in Figures 3, 4 and 5. While the pictured
patterns do not embody all the features of the more complicated manikins,
they are much less costly to produce and still provide accurate body dimen-
sional and mobility data readily useful to the designer. These illustrations
are accurate as presented to allow the user to duplicate the patterns, cut
them out, and actually make up serviceable 1/4 scale, 5th, 50th, and 95th
percentile manikins.
For users who wish to assemble the cut-out manikins, the following
symbology should be understood:
A target, Vf/ , indicates a joint center and should be drilled in accor-
dance with available fasteners.
Two targets connected by a straight line, such as in the upper torso
and upper arm, represent a slot of a convenient diameter to permit slippage
of the fastener. This slot permits the arm to be placed in both the
functional reach and functional reach, extended positions.
Index hole = • ; Adjustment hole = o .
"E," which appears adjacent to adjustment holes in the head, neck,
torso, and lower limb, indicates adjustment holes for the erect body posi-
tion, both standing and seated. When the index holes ( • ) are aligned with
the adjustment hole ( o ) marked "E," the manikin is adjusted to a normal
III-lOl
erect body position. When the index holes are aligned with the other holes,
the joint in consideration is at an extreme of its motion capability.
It is extremely important to follow instructions when fabricating these
manikins. With the manikins in the standing erect position (as illustrated),
the following instructions apply.
Joint A (Head):
Drill index hole through both top and bottom pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece only.
Scribe "E" on bottom piece.
Joint B (Neck):
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
Scribe "E" on bottom piece.
Joint C (Mid-chest--below arm attachment slot):
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through top piece.
Scribe "E" on top piece.
Joint D (Abdomen):
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
Scribe "E" on bottom piece.
Joint E (Hip) :
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
Scribe "E"s and "X" on bottom piece.
Joint F (Knee):
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
Scribe "E" , "5" and "95" on bottom piece.
Joint G (Ankle):
Drill index hole through top piece only.
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
III-102
Joint H (Elbow):
Drill index hole through both pieces.
Drill adjustment holes through top piece.
Scribe "5" and "95" on top piece.
Joint I (Wrist):
Drill index hole through top piece only .
Drill adjustment holes through bottom piece.
When the manikin is in use, functional reach ("TR" mark on hand) and
finger tip reach ("FT" mark on hand) can be accurately simulated by align-
ing "YR" in the slot in the upper arm with "7R" in the slot in the upper
torso, with the arm straight and extended forward. Functional reach extended
("FRX" mark on the hand) and finger tip reach can be simulated by similarly
aligning "FRX" on the torso and arm.
When the index hole is aligned with "5" or "95" at the knee or elbow,
5th and 95th percentile knee and elbow flexion, respectively, are achieved.
When in the "E" position, the joint is fully extended.
When the index hole at the hip is adjusted to one of the two "E"
adjustment holes, that joint is in the seated or standing erect position;
when adjusted to "X", the hip is hyperextended. When at one of the remaining
two adjustment holes, the hip is either normally extended or flexed.
III-103
Figure 3. Two-dimensional 5%ile USAF manikin (simplified version)
III- 104
Figure 4. Two-dimensional 50%ile USAF manikin (simplified version),
III-105
Figure 5. Two-dimensional 95%ile USAF manikin (simplified version),
w-y^^
N79-n738
CHAPTER IV
THE INERTIAL PROPERTIES OF THE BODY AND ITS SEGMENTS
by
Herbert M. Reynolds
The University of Michigan
The purpose of this chapter is to present a user-oriented suntnary
of the current state of knowledge on the mass distribution properties of
the adult human body. Design engineers, the most common users of such data,
have two sources of information for establishing human biomechanical limita-
tions relevant to their design product. These are directly measured data
and output from mathematical models. Empirical data are obviously the more
desirable but are often either unavailable or unattainable on living subjects
so the output from mathematical models becomes the sole source of design
information. These models have, in the past, been based upon the properties
of geometric analogues of body segments. While this approach serves a useful
purpose in examining population problems where the variation in the popula-
tion is greater than the error in the model, it does not provide a design
engineer with the needed sensitivity to design equipment for a highly
selected group of astronauts.
Collected here for the first time are all the known data describing
the mass distribution properties of the body presented in such a manner
that mathematical models can be highly individualized. This material, which
includes data for living whole bodies in static positions and segment data
obtained from cadaver studies, will provide both direction for constructing
mass distribution models and a range of values by which the model output
can be evaluated.
Mass distribution properties will be discussed in terms of the
musculoskeletal linkage system, axes systems, mass, volume, center of mass,
and inertial properties. In the following sections data and prediction
equations or coefficients suitable for modeling these properties are pro-
vided.
Predictive formulas presented in this chapter and suitable for both
the whole body and its segments will employ, primarily, total body weight
and stature as the independent variables. While some computations have been
completed and presented here, the user may be interested in computing for
a different population. In this case either an individual's measured height
and weight could be used or the appropriate population statistics (See
Chapter III) could be substituted.
While the prediction equations and resulting estimates will be of use
in the preliminary analysis of the design problem for a population, they will
not be sensitive to individual variations which may be of significance in
designing for a specific astronaut or scientist. For this purpose the reader
IV- 1
will be referred to various tables in Appendix B in which data and computa-
tion techniques for estimating the biomechanical properties of the individual
appear. Equations provided in this Appendix are aimed at describing segments
of the body in such a way that differences between individuals can be
observed and will help the designer determine the range and extent to which a
particular piece of equipment needs to be personalized. These data also
provide biomechanical input for individualized models useful in solving
workspace design problems or analyzing dynamic environments.
Data Sources and Limitations
The data and prediction equations presented in this chapter are based,
in general, on small samples of living and cadaveric subjects typical of the
White European male. In the very few cases where data were available on males
and females of other races, the information has been reviewed and incorpo-
rated in the appropriate table or prediction equations. However, the
fact that most of the data were collected on white European males presents
an undeniable problem to the design engineer concerned with a population
whose range in size goes from the fifth percentile Oriental woman to the
95th percentile Caucasoid male.
Many different techniques have been utilized for measuring the mass
distribution properties of the whole body. Hay (1973) gives an excellent re-
view of these studies and points out the two major difficulties in studies of
the living; (1) fluid and tissue shifts in the measurement procedure and (2)
the static, or position-dependent, nature of the measured locations. When a
whole body is measured, the data are con^jletely valid only when applied to a
body in that position. Thus, in order to determine the location of the center
of mass for any given body, it is necessary to measure either every possible
body position or to measure the location of the center of mass in each body
segment and model the whole body from the sum of its segments. The latter
approach has been emphasized in the present chapter since it provides infor-
mation on a wider range ot body types and body positions.
The segment model approach has been a recent development and most of
the data are derived from European and U.S. studies of cadavers (Harless,
1860; Braune and Fischer, 1889, 1892; Fischer, 1906; Dempster, 1955; Clauser
et al. 1969; and Chandler et al . 1975). Two additional studies by Mori and
Yaraamoto (1959) and Fujikawa (1963) provide some data on the mass distribu-
tion of twelve Japanese cadavers. Although the total sample size from all the
above-mentioned studies is limited, it probably provides a better estimate
for the desired biomechanical properties than do the present geometric
models.
Measurements on the body segments of living subjects have usually
relied upon indirect methods. Segment weight has been estimated by measur-
ing segment volume (Drillis and Contini, 1966) and by measuring the reaction
change on a weight board due to segment displacement (Bernstein et al .
1931). Segment center of mass measurements have used volumetric estimates
IV-2
(Bernstein et al . 1931; Cleaveland, 1955) .Inertial data have been collected
almost exclusively on the links using indirect measurement techniques to
estimate a single moment of inertia about a joint center of rotation (Fenn,
Brody, and Petrilli, 1931; Fenn, 1938; Hill, 1940; Bouisset and Pertuzon,
1968, Allum and Young, 1976). These techniques, in general, assume knowledge
of segment density, segment center of mass, and joint centers of rotation
depending upon the variable under investigation. A promising indirect
technique for measuring the mass distribution properties of the living human
body appears to be stereophotogrammetric measures of volume as developed by
Herron et al. (197 6).
In addition to the lack of complete population data, there are no
data on the effect of the secular increase in size on the mass distribution
properties of the human body. It has been assumed that these changes will
be proportional, thus making a linear solution to any problem possible.
For example, if an increase in stature of 0.57o occurs in the next 10 years
it is assumed that there would be a corresponding increase in link length.
Furthermore, the assumption is made that statistical relationships would
remain the same, e.g., the correlation coefficient between acroraion-radiale
length and stature would remain constant. The design engineer and modeler
should be alerted to these kinds of assumptions (which we make, for example,
in combining linkage data from Dempster, 1955, and Snyder, Chaffin, and
Schultz, 1972) so that he can assess the data within his tolerance limits
and decide on the extent to which these data can be relied upon.
Two further limitations of the basic data should be mentioned before
proceeding.
First, the relationship between data collected from living subjects
and data based on cadaver studies has never been defined. This means that
it is not yet known how accurately data garnered from a cadaver can be
applied to the living. In addition, the error in estimating data from
indirect measurements made on living subjects has also not been defined.
Secondly, all data so far collected were measured at one-g and the
changes which a zero-g environment effect on an individual were not consid-
ered. One means of dealing with this problem is discussed in following
sections on linkage and mass.
The Anatomical Framework
The human body is often compared to a machine. Persuaded by this
concept, one is easily led to rely on mechanical concepts to describe the
geometry and motion of the body in the biomechanical framework. However, one
must recognize that the present mechanical treatment of the human anatomy
with mechanical analogies is only an approximation of a highly complex and
variable system. As a first step in clarifying the construction of the human
body, an anatomical description of joint centers of rotation, axes systems,
and body linkages is given in great detail in Appendix A. The user of
IV- 3
this chapter is strongly urged to read this Appendix and obtain some grasp
of the anatomical structure that underlies all these biomechanical data.
Without a thorough understanding, the user is likely to go astray in apply-
ing the data.
In the study of anatomy, three planes — sagittal, frontal, and trans-
verse--have been hypothetically superiiiposed on the body to describe the
relative location of its anatomical features. The usual directional notation
system used to describe locations relative to these planes is as follows
with the corresponding, right-hand rule axis system nomenclature in paren-
thesis:
Anterior — towards the front (+X)
Posterior--towards the rear (-X)
Lateral — towards the side: Left (+Y) , Right (-Y)
Medial--towards the middle: Left (-Y), Right (+Y)
Superior — towards the head (+Z)
Inferior — towards the feet (-Z)
With the body in the standard anatomical position, the sagittal plane
is defined by the X- and Z-axes; the frontal, or coronal, plane is defined
by the Y- and Z-axes; and the transverse, or horizontal, plane is defined
by the X- and Y-axes (See Figure 1). This superstructure of intersecting
planes has not traditionally been anchored to any single location in the
body. For biokinematic research and engineering hardware design a whole body
axis system should be fixed (rather than "floating") through use of specific
anatomical or anthropometric landmarks. The axes proposed in this chapter use
three definable landmarks selected so that they form a plane approximately
parallel to one of the cardinal anatomical planes of the body. A right-
handed, orthogonal axis system is then constructed using the anthropometric
plane of orientation, a perpendicular plane and a plane normal to the other
two planes. Thus, the axis system will be defined by the intersection of
three orthogonal planes of reference and a defined point of origin .
Although a number of axes systems have been proposed (Santschi et
al. 1963; Ignazi et al. 1972; and Chandler et al . 1975; Panjabi et al.
1974; Thomas et al. 1975) the whole body axis system which appears at this
time to be best suited for biomechanical models is one centered on the pelvis
(See Figure 1) .
There are several reasons for choosing this system. First, the center
of mass of the whole body in every position is approximately at the site of
the pelvis. Second, the pelvis can be treated as a rigid body. Third, the
human body in its most elemental form is hinged at the pelvis. In other
words, a major controlling factor in attitude and motion of the body is the
spatial orientation and location of the pelvis.
Therefore, it is recommended that a frontal plane (YZ) be established
using symphysion and the right and left anterior superior iliac spines. The
transverse (XY) plane is constructed as a perpendicular to the YZ plane while
passing through the right and left anterior superior iliac spines. The sagit-
tal (XZ) plane is constructed as a normal to the YZ and XY planes while pass-
IV-4
Frontal
Transverse
Figure 1. Whole body axis system centered on the pelvis.
IV-5
ing through syn^hysion. The coordinate axis system origin will lie on a line
passing through the right and left anterior superior iliac spines approxi-
mately at the midpoint of bispinous diameter. The +X axis will pass
anteriorly along the intersection of the XY and XZ planes; the +Y axis will
pass laterally along the intersection of the XY and YZ planes; and the +Z
axis will pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ and YZ planes.
Similar frames of reference have been provided for body segments (See
Appendix A). Theoretically, a biomechanical segment of the body is the
largest dimensional mass which, when moved, will maintain a constant
geometry. Thus, body segments are defined as the mass which lies between two
adjacent segmentation surfaces which pass through their respective joint
centers of rotation. For example, the forearm is a biomechanical body segment
since it has a mass that lies between the wrist and elbow joint centers of
rotation. It is, in other words, a body link — a term borrowed from rigid body
mechanics which is used frequently to refer to the straight-line distance
between two adjacent joint centers of rotation.
In general, the principal body segments are easily identified although
the specific segmentation planes and their locations are not as easily deter-
mined. The number of principal body segments differ in the literature, parti-
cularly with respect to the torso which has been segmented into individual
vertebral sections (Liu and Wickstrom, 1973) and left intact as one mass
(Chandler et al. 1975). Other segmentation schemes utilized in mass distribu-
tion studies have been described in Reynolds et al. (1975). In addition,
there are differences in segmentation planes between studies conducted on
living subjects and cadavers (See Figure 2).
For the present chapter, the segmentation planes will follow the
rationale first presented by Braune and Fischer (1892) and simulated in
subsequent studies. This scheme segments the body at the level of joint
centers of rotation thereby providing data correlated with the linkage system
of the body. Dempster (1955) and Snyder et al. (1972) have provided the basic
data we will use here in describing the linkage system and its spatial
description.
This chapter is a- result of sorting through numerous alternatives to
arrive at an anatomical framework most suitable for biomechanical research.
The data reflect this approach but without a thorough appreciation of the
implications of a mechanical model upon the anatomical reality, costly
mistakes and misinterpretations can occur. Therefore the user is once again
encouraged to become familiar with Appendix A for a full appreciation of the
information contained in this chapter.
The Body Linkage System
A description of the body as a linkage system provides a biomechani-
cal framework that can be used to undertake a rigorous analysis of its kine-
matics. Without this basic model, the study of the motion of the body and
its respective se^ents would be extremely difficult, if not impossible.
IV- 6
Figure 2.
Segmentation planes used in
studies of cadavers (at left)
and living bodies (at right).
IV- 7
It should be noted, before proceeding, that the concepts of body seg-
ments and body links must be handled carefully. The concept of a body segment
is useful in describing mass distribution; the concept of a body link is used
when describing body motion. When dealing with the limbs, segments and links
generally correspond. The torso, however, has such complex motion capabili-
ties that its various segments often contain more than one link.*
For the purposes of this chapter, the body is conposed of 20 links;
head, neck, thoracic, thoraco- sternum assemblage*^- (right and left transthor-
acic and transternum) , right and left clavicular, right and left scapular,
lumbar, pelvic assemblage** (right and left ilio-pelvic and transpelvic) ,
right and left upper arm, right and left forearm, right and left thigh, right
and left shank, right and left foot. These links are illustrated in Figure 3
and defined in Appendix A.
Theoretically, links are pure straight line distances between centers
of joint rotation. In fact, due to the con^jlex nature of actual joint motion,
the link is an average straight-line distance calculated from points at the
mid-range of joint mobility. For a more conplete discussion of the body link-
age system and the underlying anatomical assunptions, the reader is referred
to Dempster's "Space Requirements of the Seated Operator" (1955).
Limb Links
The first step in determining the length of links in the arms and legs
is to determine lengths of the relevant long bones, which in turn can be
estimated from stature. Then, using coefficients which have been derived as a
ratio of link length to bone length, link lengths are determined by
multiplying bone lengths by the link/bone coefficients. A step-by-step
description of these procedures follows:
The four limb links and their associated bones are: upper arm (hum-
erus), forearm (radius and ulna), thigh (femur), and shank (tibia and
* Insufficient research has been conducted to resolve in a logical and
consistent manner the apparent conflict between torso links and segments.
** Both of these linkage assemblages are closed systems composed of three
straight-line distances and three joint centers of rotation. They are
considered assemblages, at present, since no one straight-line distance
in an assemblage can move independently of the other two.
IV-8
Shank
Neck
Thoraco-sternum
Scapular
Thoracic
(Transpel vie)
Figure 3. Linkage system.
IV-9
fibula). In the following discussion and accompanying tables it will be noted
that the shank link is presented for tibia length only, whereas the forearm
link is described relative to either the radius or ulna. This discrepancy in
treatment between the shank and forearm, both of which have two long bones,
probably arises as a result of past practice among anthropometrists to
measure tibial length rather than fibula length and to measure either of the
long bones in the forearm. Design engineers may use either ratio for the
forearm or choose to average the relatively small differences between them.
Link lengths in this chapter have been obtained by combining data
from two studies: Trotter and Gleser (1958) who measured long bones in
the arms and legs using standard osteological techniques, and Dempster.
Sherr and Priest (1964) who developed coefficients and regression equa-
tions for predicting bone and link lengths.
First the bone length and stature for the sex and race groups in Trot-
ter and Gleser (1958) were normalized in the following manner:
Bone Length - Mean Bone Length
Bone Length Standard Deviation (1)
and,
Stature - Mean Stature
Stature Standard Deviation (2)
Next, a linear relationship between the two normalized variables was assumed
and the following equation was constructed using the correlation coefficient
as the regression coefficient, or slope, with an intercept equal to zero:
Bone Length - Mean Bone Length
Bone Length Standard Deviation
= Corr. Coef. Stature - Mean Stature
Stature Standard Deviation (3)
with
Se = Bone Standard Deviation \/ 1 - (Corr. Coef.) (4)-
est V
By substituting the appropriate variables from Trotter and Gleser
(1958) into equation #3 and solving for the dependent and independent
variables, the standard regression equation is generated in the form:
y = bx + a*"- (5)
*The derivation of these equations can be found in Croxton (p. 175-176,
1959).
**Where y=bone length, x=stature, b=slope and a=intercept.
IV- 10
with an accompanying standard error of the estimate (equation #4). Table 1
presents the regression equations derived to predict bone lengths from sta-
ture for white and black American females and white American, black American,
and Oriental males.
To use these equations, an appropriate value for stature is selected
and inserted into the equation which is then solved for the appropriate bone
length. The same stature value is used for all bone lengths to describe a
particular individual or group of individuals. Table 2 presents values
derived from the equations in Table 1 for 5th, 50th, and 95th percentile
stature data predicted for white males and females in 1985 (See Chapter III,
Appendix B) .
For these bone length estimates, Dempster, Sherr, and Priest (1964)
have provided coefficients to estimate the corresponding link length. Table
3 presents these coefficients which have been derived as a ratio of link
length to bone length.
To compute link lengths, the coefficients presented in Table 3 are
multiplied by the bone lengths calculated from equations in Table 1. In the
present case, the data in Table 2 have been multiplied by the appropriate
coefficients in Table 3 to generate the link lengths presented in Table 4.
It is interesting to note that the coefficients in Table 3 were computed from
data on male whites only and yet the results in Table 4 appear, on the basis
of the forearm link, to estimate the link lengths of females with better cor-
respondence between estimates than for males.
Dempster, Sherr and Priest (1964) also derived regression equations
to estimate link lengths directly from anthropometric measures of bone length
(See Appendix B, Table 1). When bone length data are available for individual
astronauts, for example, these equations can be used to estimate individual
link lengths more precisely.
Link lengths for the hands and feet are calculated from the wrist and
ankle joint centers to the respective centers of mass. These data are
presented in the next section in which the segment centers of mass are
discussed. However, Dempster (1955) provides two coefficients to estimate
hand and foot links. The hand link is estimated as 20.67. of humerus length
(See Table 1); the foot link is estimated as 30.67o of foot length (See
Chapter III).
Head and Torso
The torso with its unique characteristics of motion and the complex
spatial relationships of its parts is the most difficult part of the body
to describe within the linkage framework. While a number of approaches are
possible, the input parameters used to describe the kinematic properties of
the torso in this chapter will be relative to three links for the spinal col-
umn (neck, thorax, and lumbar) , a link assemblage for the pelvic girdle
IV- 11
TABLE 1
REGRESSION EQUATIONS FOR ESTIMATING LIMB LENGTHS*
Female
Se
a)
White
Humerus Length
=
0.1855
stature
+
0.771
Radius Length
=
0.130
stature
+
1.273
Ulna Length
=
0.139
stature
+
1.708
Femur Length
=
0.289
stature
-
3.516
Tibia Length
=
0.242
stature
-
4.870
Fibula Length
=
0.2A3
stature
-
4.695
b)
Black
Humerus Length
=
0.181
stature
+
1.699
Radius Length
=
0.143
stature
+
0.580
Ulna Length
=
0.130
stature
+
4.535
Femur Length
=
0.310
stature
-
6.214
Tibia Length
=
0.265
stature
-
7.221
Fibula Length
=
0.261
stature
-
6.471
Mai
e
a)
White
Humerus Length
=
0.185
stature
+
1.338
Radius Length
=
0.137
stature
+
1.467
Ulna Length
=
0.140
stature
+
2.688
Femur Length
=
0.281
stature
-
1.902
Tibia Length
=
0.268
stature
-
8.369
Fibula Length
=
0.257
stature
-
6.490
b)
Black
Humerus Length
=
0.202
stature
-
0.969
Radius Length
=
0.157
stature
-
0.599
Ulna Length
=
0.158
stature
-
1.013
Femur Length
=
0.314
stature
-
9.740
Tibia Length
=
0.288
stature
-
9.740
Fibula Length
=
0.266
stature
-
6.129
c)
Oriental
Humerus Length
=
0.213
stature
-
4.028
Radius Length
=
0.160
stature
-
2.364
Ulna Length
=
0.158
stature
-
0.244
Femur Length
=
0.303
stature
-
6.621
Tibia Length
=
0.292
stature
-
12.951
Fibula Length
=
0.303
stature
-
14.659
est
(+1.03)
(+0.76)
(+0.89)
(+1.30)
(±1.15)
(+1.13)
(+1.05)
(±1.14)
(±0.99)
(±1.27)
(±1.25)
(+1.22)
(±1.17)
(±0.89)
(±0.93)
(±1.44)
(±1.33)
(+1.22)
(±1.13)
(±1.02)
(±1.06)
(±1.49)
(±1.40)
(+1.32)
(±1.22)
(±0.98)
(±1.03)
(±1.48)
(±1.14)
(+1.14)
*All values are given in centimeters,
by .3937.
To convert to inches, multiply
IV-12
TABLE 2
BONE LENGTH VALUES ESTIMATED FOR 1985 POPULATION*
Limb
Humerus
Radius
Ulna
Femur
Tibia
Fibula
Male White
5th 5Gth
95 th
Female White
5th 50th
95 th
32.03
(12.61)
34.08
(13.42)
36.16
(14.24)
29.23
(11.51)
31.12
(12.25)
32.96
(12.98)
24.20
(9.53)
25.72
(10.13)
27.25
(10.73)
21.22
(8.35)
22.54
(8.87)
23.83
(9.38)
25.91
(10.20)
27.47
(10.81)
29.04
(11.43)
23.03
(9.07)
24.45
(9.63)
25.82
(10.17)
4^.72
(17.61)
47.84
(18.83)
50.98
(20.07)
40.82
(16.07)
43.76
(17.23)
46.63
(18.36)
36.09
(14.21)
39.07
(15.38)
42.07
(16.56)
32.25
(12.70)
34.72
(13.67)
37.12
(14.61)
36.15
(14.23)
39.00
(15.35)
41.88
(16.49)
32.58
(12.83)
35.06
(13.80)
37.47
(14.75)
'■Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
TABLE 3
RATIOS OF LINK LENGTH TO BONE LENGTH
(After Dempster, et al. 1964)
Ratio of Lengths
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Upper Arm Link/
Humerus Length
Forearm Link/Ulna Length
Forearm Link/Radius Length
Thigh Link/Femur Length
Shank Link/Tibia Length
32
89.447o
1.597„
32
98.70
2.66
26
107.09
3.53
32
90.34
0.88
33
107.76
1.81
IV- 13
TABLE 4
LINK LENGTH VALUES ESTIMATED FOR 1985 POPULATION*
Limb
Upper Arm Link
Forearm Link
(Ulna)
Forearm Link
(Radius)
Thigh Link
Shank Link
Male White
5th 50th
7otile %tile
95 th
%tile
F(
5 th
7otile
emale White
50 th
7otile
95 th
%tile
28.65
(11.28)
30.48
(12.00)
32.34
(12.73)
26.14
(10.29)
27.83
(10.96)
29.48
(11.61)
25.57
(10.07)
27.11
(10.67)
28.66
(11.28)
22.73
(8.95)
24.13
(9.50)
25.48
(10.03)
25.92
(10.20)
27.54
(10.84)
29.18
(11.49)
22.72
(8.94)
24.13
(9.50)
25.52
(10.05)
40.40
(15.91)
43.22
(17.02)
46.06
(18.13)
36.88
(14.52)
39.53
(15.56)
42.13
(16.59)
38.89
(15.31)
42.10
(16.57)
45.33
(17.85)
34.75
(13.68)
37.41
(14.73)
40.00
(15.75)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
(right and left ilio-pelvic and transpelvic) , and five links for the shoulder
girdle (thoraco- sternum assemblage, right and left clavicular, and right and
left scapular). These links are defined in Appendix A and illustrated in
Figure 3.
A fairly complete discussion of some of these links can be found in
Dempster (1955). He provides coefficients based on cadaver data for estimat-
ing the clavicular and transpelvic links. The clavicular link is estimated
as 35.2% of biacromial breadth (See Chapter III); the transpelvic link is
estimated as 37.27. of femur length (See Table 1). He did not provide
coefficients for estimating any of the remaining links in the torso.
Thus, with the publication of Dempster's work on the linkage system of the
human body, the links in the appendages were defined quantitatively, the
links in the shoulder and pelvic girdles were identified and the links in the
spinal column were as yet unstudied.
In 1961, S. P. Geoffrey attempted to establish the spatial relation-
ship between the hip joint center and the shoulder joint center. This is the
only extant quantitative description of the distance between the shoulder
and hip joint centers of rotation. Geoffrey studied twelve men to locate
these joint centers radiographically in the sagittal plane for the purpose of
constructing a two-dimensional design manikin. The average distance between
the shoulder joint center and the hip joint center is 47.4 cm (18.67 in.)
IV- 14
which is representative of the average joint center-to- joint center dimension
in the erect seated position for a 50th percentile 1985 male.
The next attenpt to examine the torso linkage system was made in 19 72
by Snyder, Ghaffin, and Schutz. Their report contains a prediction model of
torso mobility relative to two reach envelopes for the right elbow. Their
data define the configuration of a collection of discrete skeletal landmarks
for a specific elbow reach position; the data do not describe interrelation-
ships between these landmarks which would define the torso linkage system.
We will not attempt here to synthesize their model or to draw conclusions
from it. Rather, we will encourage the reader to refer to the original
publication.
A computer model developed for this chapter has produced the
illustrations in Figures 4, 5, 6, and 7. These stick figure drawings depict a
50th percentile 1985 male in a seated reach configuration typically encoun-
tered in work environments. This model is based upon equations developed in
the Snyder et al. study, as well as equations for the limbs presented in
Table 1. As can be observed in the illustrations, there are spatial data on a
large number of skeletal landmarks. These landmarks represent typical
candidates in the spinal column for joint centers of rotation from vAiich a
linkage system of the spinal column could be developed. The Snyder report
contains data on almost all the vertebra in the spinal column, but additional
analysis is required to determine the minimum number and location of the
links necessary to describe motion in the torso.
At this point, some observations with respect to a general statement
concerning our knowledge of the link system is necessary. Dempster has pro-
vided us with sufficient information on the linkage system of the appendages
to establish useable population estimates. Geoffrey established a dimension
for the relationship between the shoulder and hip joint centers but his data
are insufficient for population estimates. The most recent attempt by Snyder
et al. considers the torso linkage system within the general context of a
workspace reach problem. Therefore, there are data available which provide
a generalized understanding of the body linkage system, but quantitative
population estimates Ire, at present, unavailable.
In order to complete the current linkage model of the body, substan-
tial information is needed on the pelvic assemblage. Furthermore, subsequent
data must be collected relative to standard body dimensions taken in an
initial body position used in traditional anthropometry. In summary, a
linkage system of the body has been proposed and modeled but not com-
pletely validated for any body positions.
The Torso in Zero-Gravity
The torso linkage system discussed above represents the body config-
uration under one-g conditions (.e.g. terrestrial environment) and, for space
applications, must be modified to conform with the current understanding of
the changes that occur under zero-gravity conditions.
IV- 15
7<>
80
i
31
KEY:
1
Right Acromion
3
Suprasternale
4
C7 Surface
5
T4 Surface
6
T8 Surface
7
T12 Surface
8
L2 Surface
9
L5 Surface
10
Rt Anterior Superior Sp
29
Nasion
30
Right Elbow
31
Arms/Hands
32
Legs/Feet
33
SRP
w
5 inches
Figure 4. A computer model of body linkage:
with extended elbow.
50th percentile 1985 man
IV- 16
KEY:
1 Right Acromion
3 Suprasternale
4 C7 Surface
5 T4 Surface
6 T8 Surface
7 T12 Surface
8 L2 Surface
9 L5 Surface
10 Rt Anterior Superior Sp
n L5/S1 Interspace
14 L2/L3 Interspace
16 T12/L1 Interspace
17 T8/T9 Interspace
18 T4/T5 Interspace
19 C7/T1 Interspace
20 Acromion-Clavicular June
21 Projected Humeral Head
22 Sterno-Clavicular June
27 C2/C3 Interspace
28 C2 Surface
29 Nasion
33 SRP
5 Inches
Figure 5. Internal anatomical landmarks of the torso for body position
depicted in Figure 4.
IV- 17
Right Acromion
Suprasternal e
C7 Surface
T4 Surface
T8 Surface
7 112 Surface
8 L2 Surface
L5 Surface
10 Rt Anterior Superior Sp
29 Nasi on
30 Right Elbow
Arms/Hands
Legs/Feet
31
32
33 SRP
5 inches
Figure 6. Computer model of body linkage: 50th percentile 1985 man
in resting one-g seated position.
IV-18
KEY:
1 Right Acromion
3 Supratsernale
4 C7 Surface
5 T4 Surface
6 T8 Surface
7 T12 Surface
8 L2 Surface
9 L5 Surface
10 Rt Anterior Superior Sp
11 L5/S1 Interspace
14 L2/L3 Interspace
16 T12/L1 Interspace
17 T8/T9 Interspace
18 T4/T5 Interspace
19 C7/T1 Interspace
20 Acromion-Clavicular June
21 Projected Humeral Head
22 Sterno-Clavicular June
27 C2/C3 Interspace
28 C2 Surface
29 Nasion
33 SRP
5 Inches
Figure 7. Internal anatomical landmarks of the torso for body
position depicted in Figure 6.
IV- 19
It has been reported (Thornton et al, , 1974) by astronauts that their
stature increases by as much as two inches in space. This increase probably
occurs primarily in the torso and only slightly in the lower limbs (knee and
ankle joints) .
The upright stance of the human body on earth is achieved by means
of an S-shaped adaptation in the spinal column which begins as a. single con-
tinuous curve at birth. In the zero-g environment, gravity no longer acts
to compress the spinal column; and the typical lordosis and kyphosis curves
in the spine are no longer a functional requirement for upright pos-
ture. Figure 8 illustrates the typical relaxed "weightless" posture assumed
in the zero-g environment (Jackson, Bond and Gunderson, 1975) .
To reflect the elimin
be elongated and straight
distances and angles for
(1972), portrays the effects
intervertebral expansion f
approximately 3.7 cm (1.5
will obviously be subject
the vertebrae and straighten
ation of gravitational pull, torso link data must
ened. Table 5, based on an analysis of vector
all one-g positions reported on in Snyder et al .
of modifying the link data. By allowing for a 5%
actor and straightening the curved spinal column,
inches) of "growth" can be explained. This growth
to individual variations in both expansion among
ing of the thoraco- lumbar spinal column.
TABLE 5
VALUES COMPUTED FROM SNYDER ET AL. (1972) DATA DEMONSTRATING
POSSIBLE SOURCE OF ZERO-GRAVITY TORSO "GROWTH"
Intervertebral
Link Length
57o Expansion
Links
(1-g)
Facte
)r (0-g)
(Expansion)
L5/S1 - L4/L5
3.66 (1.44)
.18
(0.07)
L4/L5 - L3/L4
3.63 (1.43)
.18
(0.07)
L3/L4 - L2/L3
3.86 (1.52)
.20
(0.08)
L2/L3 - L1/L2
3.63 (1.43)
.18
(0.07)
L1/L2 - T12/L1
3.66 (1.44)
.18
(0.07)
T12/L1 - T8/T9
11.28 (4.44)
.56
(0.22)
T8/T9 - T4/T5
9.47 (3.73)
.48
(0.19)
T4/T5 - C7/T1
8.91 (3.51)
.46
(0.18)
Subtotal
2.42
(0,95)
(Straightening)
L5/S1 - C7/T1
46.41 (18.27)
1.30
(0.51)
Total "Growth"
3.72
(1.46)
'Data given in centimeters with inches in
parentheses.
IV-20
24.5'+5
H^r<ynnt^1 rmf^rmnct
IV- 21
Center of Mass
This section will serve as a general guide for locating the whole body
center of mass.* The center of mass of the whole body is best predicted from
individualized models in which the center of mass is computed from the sum
of segments. Measurements of living subjects under one-g conditions have
established that the center of mass of the whole body is always in close
proximity to the pelvis and appears to remain, regardless of body configura-
tion, at the approximate level of the anterior superior iliac spines. This
relationship evidently changes under zero-gravity conditions. Data on the
location of the center of mass in static whole bodies and predictive
equations for body segments locations will be given in this section.
Most of the whole body center of mass locations have been measured
with the body in either a standing or sitting position. Since both living
subjects and cadavers have been measured in these studies, comparisons
between the two sets of data can be made.
In all of the investigations cited, measurements have been taken with
the body in a static position under one-g environmental conditions. As has
already been noted, one effect of zero-gravity on the torso is to extend the
vertebral column. Another effect is a shift in body fluids, reducing them
in the limbs and increasing them in the torso. These conditions, which have
the effect of moving the center of mass toward the head, generally describe
embalmed cadavers, particularly those stored in the supine position. With the
force of gravity acting on the supine body, the vertebral column tends to
straighten, thereby extending the torso length. This phenomenon has been
noted for the living when, upon rising in the morning, the body is approxi-
mately .5 to .75 inches taller than it is at night (Backman, 1924; Damon,
196A). In addition, body fluids in embalmed cadavers tend to pool in the head
and torso, since they are generally at the lowest level of the body in the
supine position and have a volume of unfilled space greater than other parts
of the body. Thus, vdiile the causes of an extension of the vertebral column
and a shift in body fluids are not the same in cadavers and living persons
in a zero-g environment, the effects are similar.
Much of the data in the following tables have been measured on
embalmed cadavers. If the design engineer accepts the assunption that the
mass distribution of the zero-gravity astronaut is more analogous to embalmed
cadavers than living subjects on earth, then relevant cadaver coefficients
and equations should be utilized. There do exist some alternative data from
studies in which the location of the center of mass of body segments for
living subjects were measured indirectly using volumetric or reaction change
techniques. Engineers using these data should be aware of an underlying
assumption in this case too, namely, that these results assume constant
density throughout the body part measured, thus equating center of mass with
center of volume.
*The center of mass measured under zero-gravity conditions and the center
of gravity measured under one-g conditions are considered for practical
purposes to be the same. The major difference occurs as a result of the
force of gravity distorting living tissues and redistributing fluids in
the body.
IV- 2 2
Whole Body
In general, the center of mass in living adult males and females in
the standing position is 55% of stature as measured from the floor (Crosky
et al. 1922; Cotton, 1931; Hellebrandt et al. 1937; Ignazi et al. 1972;
Page, 1974). The center of mass in adult male cadavers is slightly higher
at 59% of stature (Clauser et al. 1969; Chandler et al. 1975). Ignazi
et al. (1972), confirming that the center of mass is at 55% of sta-
ture, further pinpointed the measurement at 97.2% of anterior superior iliac
spine height (measuring from the floor), at 507o of bicristal breadth in the
y-axis, and 31.77., of a line perpendicular to two parallel lines tangent to
the heel and toes (measured from the heel) on the x-axis.
In 1962 Swearingen measured the location of the center of mass of the
whole body in 67 positions. His saiiple consisted of five adult men with an
average weight of 163.85 lbs (113.25-225.1 lbs) and an average stature of
68,8 inches (64.75-72.0 inches"). Swearingen attempted to define the maximum
displacement of the center of mass of the whole body relative to the pelvis.
Swearingen first located the center of gravity for each of his
subjects in an initial erect standing body position. All body appendages,
including the upper torso were then moved around the pelvis which remained in
the same position relative to the measurement device. For example, to
determine maximum displacement in an anterior direction, the center of
gravity was first located for an erect standing position relative to the
position of the pelvis in the measurement device. Keeping the pelvis fixed,
the body parts were moved anteriorly to determine the maximum displacement
possible. Table 6 defines the spatial envelope within which the location of
centers of gravity for most of the common body positions will fall.
On the following pages we present the results of three studies aimed
at locating the center of mass in living subjects. The results in all three
studies have been reported using different axes systems. However, when the
data are examined using comparable axes systems, the differences disappear,
or become negligible. (To avoid confusion, the data are reported and illu-
strated here in their original axis systems.) In all cases, individualized
data are presented in the report and if a user needs design information for
a specific individual, he is encouraged to utilize the original report and
match his subject on the basis of height and weight rather than using the
sample summaries reported herein.
In the first study, Santschi, DuBois, and Omoto (1963) measured the
location of the center of mass in three axes for eight positions depicted
in Figure 9. A summary of their data appears in Table 7 which is presented
relative to a right-handed orthogonal axis system. The x-axis shown in the
illustration accompanying Table 7 is measured posteriorly to the back plane
(YZ) . The y-axis is measured as one-half of bispinous diameter in the mid-
sagittal plane (XZ) . The z-axis is measured superiorly to vertex as a
perpendicular to a transverse plane (XY) . The average location of the center
of mass for this sample of 66 male subjects represents that found in an
IV- 2 3
4J
1
1*4
IS
4J
•o
Ul
U
r-l
CO
0)
•o
•H
0)
0)
c j:
s
•o
p-l
IS
Ul
IB
Ji
0)
•
»
•H 4J
u
c
00
u
tfl
"O
•
lA
o
(0
■o
^
IS
0)
•H
CB
4J M
oo-o c
u
l-l
c
«M|
in
>
<«
01
(8 O
0)
C -H
m o
(0
f— 1
4J
o
U
^
_ O
^^
<B
j:
Ei:
(S
IS
c
•O 1-1
c
u
>i
»J
i-i
0)
•o
"O
4>
01 vu
•a
" O
•H
l« 4)
1— *
4J
IS
1
4)
•o
c
3 00
c
0) 4J
»
4J
- in
»-4
(S
4J
IS
o.
o
c
.-( c
■O -H
c
i:'S.
1.1
^4
c
fli
4)
"O
<n
UJ ^
<n
C m
•
0)
4J
^
1—4
U
«i
"O
4=
E
^a
OJ
E
u
4J
T3
o
»<
•o
^
o o
c
^
o 6
•
(0
01
9)
<n
«
c
5
<n 3
(9
X
m
•H 3
C
1— 1
>
--1
•H
4)
tit
t-i o
41 Ji
I-H
XI
u E
o
J3
O
in
4J
o
O 4J
^
u
a
n)
4) -H
•H
■T3
fi
•H
I
K
u
4J
4J
?^ «
-1-1 y
4J
41
in
•
4)
in
•H
.^ 0)
<— 1
C
in in
•H
X
in
in
s
Cfl
>^
-"O
»
^ )-l
<fl
o
O E
in
4)
4J
s.
in
*-4
00 c
3
u
O.
O
f-^
l-i
s
#1
60 -f
C <fl
oo>u e
c
00
C
O.
IW
IS
•
"O
w
tg
•w Xi
c
3
o
c
•o 4;
O.
in
in
<v
1—1
e
•o
•H
- e
N
•H
4)
j:
O
IS
01
4J
•H
C J=
4J
i-H -H
•H
4J
X in
o
in
>>
C
«
•o
^
IS 4J
U
^ 5
V4
in
4) 00
«
U
•o
u
IS
0)
C
4J 1-1
•rt
01
^ 4)
<u
O
IS
^-i
CO
to
E
CO S
CO
^ E
J5
»:
U-l l-l
u
H
^
IM
o.
c
o
•H
00
4J
c
1-1
1-1
in
•o
O
c
Ou
(8
tJ
•-I
Ul
IS
•M
4J
J-l
O
•H
V
c
i4
M
u
00
00
c
c
1-(
1-<
•o
•o
c
c
IS
IS
<u
4J
in
in
u
4J
u
o
9)
4>
U
^
b)
(d
00
c
1-1
•a
c
IS
u
o
4)
).l
U
00
c
1-1
■o
c
IS
u
u
a>
u
(d
in
01
in
V
Ji
u
C
4>
U
CS
a
c
01
o
1-1
4J
4J
in
0)
•o
•O
^
u
IS
iH
IS
0)
o
3
^
o
H
0)
^
?1
iJ
<— 1
u
in
o
•O
u
1-1
l-i
V
*J
IS
0)
«
»
vt-l
4-1
o
c
H
<
l-l
o
1-1
l-l
0)
4-1
in
O
04
IS
l-l
01
4J
IB
Ul
o;
o
c
4J
E
o
M
«4
"O
0)
»4
3
U)
E
IS
3
4)
1-1
s
-5
o
w
o
l-l
I
1-1
o
4)
c
IS
t-1
a
u
IB
«
41
c
IS
c
0)
E
■s
XI
<
c
IS
IS
00
IS
Ul
Ul
l-l
4)
4J
4)
E
1-1
4J
c
4)
O
c
4)
>
• •
O^ *— I
CM "-I
-* o
in o
CM "-I
m o
O 00
CM
~3- m
• ■
~3^ in
• •
IS
4J
IS
o
*
IV-24
1. standing
2. Studla«, Araa
Over Head
3> Spread Kgle
Sitting
7- Mercury
Configuration
3- Sitting, Foreanu
Down
6. Sitting, 'nile*'^
KLeratad
Figure 9. Centers of mass in eight body positions
(from Santschi et al. 1963).
IV-25
TABLE 7
LOCATION OF CENTER OF GRAVITV BASED ON SANTSCHl ET AL. ( 1963)*
Mean
S.D.
1.
Standing
X
y
z
8.89 (3.5)
12.19 (4.8)
78.74 (31.0)
0.51
0.99
3.68
(0,20)
(0,39)
(1.45)
2.
Standing,
arms over
head
X
y
z
8.89 (3.5)
12.19 (4,8)
72.64 (28.6)
0.56
0.99
3.38
(0.22)
(0.39)
(1,33)
3.
Spread eagle
X
y
z
8.38 (3.3)
12.19 (4.8)
72.39 (28.5)
0.48
0.99
4.83
(0,19)
(0,39)
(1,90)
4.
Sitting
X
y
z
20.07 (7.9)
12.19 (4.8)
67.31 (26.5)
0,91
0.99
2.90
(0.36)
(0.39)
(1.14)
5.
Sitting, fore-
arms down
X
y
z
19.56 (7.7)
12.19 (4.8)
68.07 (26.8)
0,86
0,99
2,95
(0.34)
(0.39)
(1.16)
6.
Sitting,
thighs ele-
vated
X
y
z
18.29 (7.2)
12.19 (4.8)
58.67 (23.1)
0.94
0.99
1.98
(0.37)
(0,39)
(0,78)
7.
Mercury con-
figuration
X
y
z
20.07 (7.9)
12.19 (4.8)
68,83 (27.1)
0.86
0.99
2.90
(0.34)
(0.39)
(1.14)
8.
Relaxed
(weightless)
X
y
z
18.54 (7,3)
12.19 (4,8)
69.85 (27.5)
0.84
0.99
3,66
(0.33)
(0.39)
(1.44)
*D«ta given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
REFERENCE
LANDMARKS
L(Y) " H Bisplnous Breadth
IV- 2 6
individual slightly smaller than the 50th percentile of the 1985 white
European male population.
DuBois et al. (1964) extended the 1963 study to measure the centers
of gravity in the sitting and relaxed positions for the nude, unpressurized,
and pressurized male wearing the A/P22s-2 full pressure garment. The results
are presented in Table 8. It can be noted that the nude data for the x- and
y- axes are very similar to the Santschi data; the location of the center
of gravity along the z-axis, however, was measured superiorly to the seat
pan rather than inferiorly from vertex.
Ignazi et al. (1972) report the only recent European data on the
whole body.* Their data are summarized in Table 9. Here, too, the axis
system differs somewhat from Santschi' s in the z direction since measurements
were taken from the floor rather than from center of gravity to vertex. A
quick calculation reveals that the z-axis measured from center of gravity to
vertex in the Ignazi study averages 31.10 inches compared to 31.0 inches in
the Santschi study.
The most rigorous study of the location of the whole body center of
gravity can be found in Chandler et al . (1975) which reports the results
of an investigation into the inertial properties of six adult male cadavers.
Their data locate the center of gravity in three dimensions for three em-
balmed, cadavers frozen in the standing position and for three embalmed,
cadavers frozen in the seated position. These measurements were made on rigid
bodies, fixed within a three-dimensional inertial frame of reference, thereby
avoiding some of the methodological problems of repositioning living sub-
jects. Furthermore, this study reports measurements of the center of gravity
in the y-axis rather than assuming symmetry.
Using the same axis system as utilized by Santschi, a conparison be-
tween cadaver and living subject data was made in Reynolds et al . (1975).
This comparison reveals that for subjects matched on the basis of stature
and weight, differences in the locations of the whole body center of gravity
can be ignored for practical purposes. Except in connection with the x-axis
in the standing position, differences can be explained by reference to the
previously discussed changes in the body of the cadaver stored in a supine
position. In general, the differences in mass distribution between a cadaver
and a living human reflect shifts in tissue and fluids and a change in spinal
configuration.
The magnitude and direction of these differences can be observed in
Table 10 which reports the percentage differences between the cadavers in
the Chandler et al . (1975) study and living subjects, matched for height
*Despite the differences in average body weight between the Ignazi and
Santschi samples, a careful comparison of matched subjects reveals no sig-
nificant differences in their mass distribution properties. Thus, the dif-
ferences in the sanple means probably reflect sampling differences of statis-
tical origin.
IV- 2 7
TABLE 8
LOCATION OF CENTER OF GRAVITY BASED ON DUBOIS ET AL. (196A)*
Mean
S.D.
Nude
20.04 (7.89)
12.17 (4.79)
23.27 (9.16)
1.04 (0.41)
0.69 (0.27)
0.74 (0.29)
Sitting
Unpressurized
21.16 (8.33)
12.17 (4.79)
24.79 (9.76)
0.99 (0.39)
0.69 (0.27)
0.76 (0.30)
Pressurized
21.89 (8.62)
12.17 (4.79)
24.64 (9.70)
0.97 (0.38)
0.69 (0.27)
0.71 (0.28)
Nude
18.64 (7.34)
12.17 (4.79)
18.77 (7.39)
0.97 (0.38)
0.69 (0.27)
1-07 (0.42)
Relaxed
( Weightless )
Unpressurized x
Pressurized
19. «4 (7.81)
12.17 (4.79)
19.96 (7.86)
20.52 (8.08)
12.17 (4.79)
19.84 (7.81)
0.76 (0.30)
0.69 (0.27)
1. 14 (0.45)
0.74 (0.29)
0.69 (0.27)
1.22 (0.48)
•'Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
REFERENCE LANDMARKS
IV- 2 8
TABLE 9
LOCATION OF CENTER OF GRAVITY BASED ON IGNAZI ET AL. (1972)*
Mean
S.D.
C.V.
Mln.
Max.
Range
X-axis
15.09
(5.94)
1.31
(0.52)
8.71
(3.43)
13.40
(5.28)
17.70
(6.97)
4.30
(1.69)
y-axls
8.83
(3.48)
0.62
(0.24)
6.99
(2.75)
7.60
(2.99)
9.70
(3.82)
2.10
(0.83)
z-axls
96.49
(37.99)
4.25
(1.67)
4.40
(1.73)
86.90
(34.21)
101.10
(39.80)
14.30
(5.63)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses*
REFERENCE LANDMARKS
rAxeZg
Lx=2 bicrlstale width
IV-29
Subject
(1 & 19)
(2 ;
5c 1)
(3 i
k 1
(Chandler
&
Santsch:
L)
Stature
-2.3%
-1
.0%
-0,
.7%
Weight
0.57o
-2
.2%
-2.
.4%
Center of
Gravity
X
14.1%
10
.3%
11,
.3%
y
*
*
'<
z
-10.9%
-10
.8%
-8,
.1%
TABLE 10
COMPARISON OF CHANDLER ET AL. (1975) AND SANTSCHI ET AL. (1963)
LOCATION OF CENTER OF GRAVITY FOR THE WHOLE BODY IN SUBJECTS
MATCHED ON BASIS OF HEIGHT AND WEIGHT
Standing Sitting
0.3% -1.4% -0.8%
■17.4% -14.5% -1.2%
-17.0% -13.5% -5.2%
* i: i;
-1.7% -2.r/<, -8.r/o
*Santschi assumes body symmetry for the location of the center of
gravity along the y-axis.
and weight in the Santschi et al. (1963) study. A negative percentage means
that the Chandler cadaver subjects had a lower value than the Santschi sub-
jects. The differences in the locations of the center of gravity indicate
a posterior movement of the center of gravity in the x-axis sitting position
and a cephalad movement in the z-axes for both standing and sitting posi-
tions. Since the y-axis is the axis of symmetry, changes there are
negligible. This latter observation can be verified in the results reported
by Reynolds et al. (1975).
The standing x-axis location is difficult to measure on the living
since variation in the dimension approaches the tolerance magnitude in most
measurement systems. In the present instance, the apparent contradiction
in the cadaver data with the changes which usually take place in embalmed
cadavers is probably due to several differences between the two studies--
back plane definition and subject head position are likely candidates. The
average difference in percentage appears large but the average absolute dif-
ference is 1.2 cm (.47 in) which in most man-machine systems would probably
be imperceptible.
Therefore, the cephalad shift in the location of the center of mass
along the z-axis in zero gravity can be approximated by reducing the distance
of the center of mass from vertex by a factor of 10%. The y-axis is best
approximated by the assumption of symmetry, and the x-axis appears to be
inconsistent. At present, the user must determine first the sensitivity of
the system to shifts in the location of the center of mass along the x-axis
before using cadaver data. In general, it would appear reasonable to assume
that changes in segment position would affect the location more than tissue
and fluid shifts but this is a problem that needs more extensive research.
IV- 30
Segments
The location of the center of mass in the limbs has traditionally
been presented as a percent of link length. The torso presents a unique
problem since it has been measured as a composite segment without attempt-
ing to separate it into individual links, an approach which does not satisfy
the requirements of most three-dimensional models. Furthermore, the data
contain no information on the changing location of the center of mass caused
by fluid and organ shifts.
Most of the usable segment data have been collected from cadavers.
Table 11 presents a summary of these data as a function of the ratio of
segment length to distance of the center of mass along a longitudinal axis
from some known landmark. These data have been used to generate the best
estimate of the location of the center of mass given in Table 12. The coeffi-
cients for the X-axis (head and torso, primarily) should be multiplied
by an anthropometric dimension measured from the back plane. The coefficients
for the y-axis, which are always .5, assume segment symmetry. The coeffi-
cients for the z-axis should be multiplied by an anthropometric dimension
measured from the most proximal joint in the limbs, suprasternale in the
torso, and tragion-vertex height in the head. In all cases, the axis system
is assumed to be orthogonal and relative to the geometric shape of the
segment. (Coefficients were calculated using the average of data from the
appropriate reports listed in Table 11.)
Clauser, McConville, and Young (1969) derived regression equations
to estimate the center of mass of segments. These equations, which appear
in Appendix B, Table 2, are derived from anthropometric input for the inde-
pendent variables and locate centers of mass in two dimensions (in general,
along the x- and z-axes). They have a relatively small standard error of
the estimate. Data derived from these equations will be more appropriate
for individualized models of the body if the individual's anthropometric
information is available. In the event that individual dimensions are unknown
the coefficients given in Table 12 can be used.
Segment Weight
A total of 65 cadavers and 273 living subjects have been used in
mass distribution studies reported since 1860 but data on segment weights
remain scarce. The little data that have been recorded are difficult to
compare since definitions of segments differ. By and large, cadaver data
are the most accurate since they can be measured directly. Extrapolation
of segment weights for the living from embalmed cadavers assumes comparable
densities and there are no data to support these assuiiptions under one-
g conditions. Under zero-g conditions, however, observations made by the
astronauts suggest that changes in the body are more analogous to the mass
distribution measured in cadavers than to that indirectly measured on living
subjects. Thus, the assuitption of comparable density may provide reasonable
estimates of the segment weights of astronauts in a zero-gravity environ-
ment.
IV- 31
ORIGINAL PAGE IS
OF POOR QUALITY
se
E i
5
to
i
o
si
1
a 5
3 S
^2
5 5 . o •«>
< - o.
M
i i
f 5 S 2
CM O
o o
S 8
o o
■6 .
Is S.
I
« C (Q
MO t->
. :^
IV- 3 2
TABLE 12
LOCATION OF BODY SEGMENTS' CENTER OF MASS
Head x = Tragion to wall depth
y = .5 bitragion breadth
z = .17 tragion to vertex height
Torso X = .44 waist depth at omphalion
y = .5 waist breadth at omphalion
z = .42 suprasternale to trochanterion
Upper Arm x = Assume syitmetry
y = Assume symmetry
z = .48 link length (Tables 1 & 3)
Forearm x = Assume symmetry
y = Assume symmetry
z = .41 link length (Tables 1 & 3)
Hand x = Assume symmetry of palm at z-axis
location
y = Assume symmetry of palm at z-axis
location
z = .51 palm length
Thigh X = Assume symmetry
y = Assume symmetry
z = .41 link length (Tables I & 3)
Shank x = Assume symmetry
y = Assume symmetry
z = .44 link length (Tables 1 & 3)
Foot X = Assume symmetry of foot at z-axis
location
y = Assume symmetry of foot at z-axis
location
z = .44 foot length (from heel)
The weight of the body segments has been estimated in a number of
ways. In 1957, Barter developed regression equations for predicting segment
weight using total body weight as the independent variable from data report-
ed by Braune and Fischer (1889), Fischer (1906), and Dempster (1955). Bar-
ter's equations, based on a sample of 12 cadavers, predicted the weight
of seven segments and various combinations of segments. In order to update
Barter' s work with additional data and provide estimates for more individual
segments, the equations in Table 13 were prepared. These equations are
based on Barter's original sample with the addition of head and neck data
IV-33
TABLE 13
PREDICTION EQUATIONS TO ESTIMATE SEOIENT WEIGHT BASED ON
REANALYSIS OF CADAVER DATA*
Segment Equation
Head .0306 (TBW) + 2.46
Head & neck .0534 (TBW) + 2.33
Neck .0146 (TBW) + .60
Head, neck & torso .5940 (TBW) - 2.20
Neck & torso .5582 (TBW) - 4.26
Total arm .0505 (TBW) + .01
Upper arm .0274 (TBW) - .01
Forearm & hand .0233 (TBW) - .01
Forearm .0189 (TBW) - .16
Hand .0055 (TBW) + .07
Total leg .1582 (TBW) + .05
Thigh .1159 (TBW) - 1.02
Shank & foot .0452 (TBW) + .82
Shank .0375 (TBW) + .38
Foot .0069 (TBW) + .47
Se
est
(5.42)
(5.14)
(1.32)
(4.85)
(9.39)
.02)
.02)
.02)
.35)
.15)
.11)
(2.25)
(1.81)
( .84)
(1.04)
.626
.726
.666
.949
.958
.829
.826
.762
.783
.605
.847
.859
.750
.763
.552
+ .43
+ .60
± '21
+ 2.01
+ 1.72
+ .35
+
+
+
+
.19
.20
.15
.07
+ 1.02
± '"^l
+ .41
+ .33
+ .11
( .95)
(1.32)
( .46)
(4.43)
(3.79)
( .77)
( .42)
( .44)
( .33)
( .15)
(2.25)
(1.57)
( .90)
( .73)
( .24)
'■'Data given in kilograms with pounds in parentheses.
from Walker et al . (1973), and head, torso, arms, and legs data from Clauser
et al. (1969) and Chandler et al. (1975). The segments are defined in
accordance with the definitions provided in Appendix A and only those seg-
ments in each study which closely matched those definitions were used in
the segment samples. Prediction equations for estimating segment weight
were also developed by Clauser et al. (1969) in their study of 13 cadavers.
These later equations utilize anthropometric dimensions as the independent
variables and are thus more sensitive to individual variations. The Clauser
et al. equations appear in Appendix B, Table 3.
A third method (referred to in the literature as the method of coeffi-
cients) makes use of percentages of total body weight to estimate segment
weights. Most of the available information on this subject appears in Table
14 and has been further refined for use by engineers and modellers in Table
15. Studies by Liu and Wickstrom (1973) and Walker et al. (1973), who
used eight cadavers in common, provided additional input for the torso
and neck data which appears in Table 15. This table is for use in determining
the mean population estimates of segment weights, and for determining the
weight of torso segments not given by the regression equations. Table 16
provides estimates of segment weights for selected total body weights using
the regression equations in Table 13 and the torso coefficients in Table
15.
IV-34
• ••■••••••
- S2
• ••••••
.P 41
5a * a
|§| - .•
'5S Z U r. <,
■ ^1 ^ • • •
1*4 wf « lA tn
'4> O 'O ift ^* O <
r> ^ « -^ CM -» I
Z 6 ^
in • • - -
r« « <o fn
r> <7* •^
O r* O
^ s
> t- M
is •6'
C £
:s
«
X
■S i
■8
S
■ b <p4
c*
r^
fS
•A
r-
o>
•«
9
<«
«
o
«:}
4J
: »
•
3
m
»o
<M
o
<o
«o
-it
w
b
b
•
c
:
i i
■a S
• ^
•
■ >
f*
l>
e
•a
•
J
a,
m
m «
3 .
m
«
e
m
p,
a
> o
1
^
b
^
m
'&
•g
1
u
-
M ••
£
M
O
s
X
»
e
£
CO
.«
Reproduced from
best available copy.
IV-35
TABLE 15
PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL BODY WEIGHT ACCORDING TO
DIFFERENT SEOIENTATION PLANS
Grouped Segments Percent of Individual Segments Percent of
Total Body Weight Grouped Segments Weight
Head and neck = 8.4%
Torso = 50.07,
Total arm = 5.1%
Total leg = 15.r/<.
Head
=
73.8%
Neck
=r
26.2%
Thorax
=
43.8%
Lumbar
=
29.4%
Pelvis
=
26.8%
Upper arm
=
54.9%
Forearm
=
33.3%
Hand
=
11.8%
Thigh
=
63.7%
Shank
=
27.4%
Foot
=
8.95!,
There are two further methods available for estimating segment weights
of living subjects, both of which incorporate an unknown error factor.
Bernstein et al. (1931) developed a technique by which a segment weight
could be estimated from a change in a lever arm moment due to the angular
displacement of discrete body segments. This technique, however, assumes
knowledge of the location of both the center of mass and joint center of
rotation and these points are difficult to locate on the living subject.
The method is further predicated on the assumption that center of mass
is equivalent to center of volume and subsequent assessment of this assump-
tion (by Clauser et al . 1969) revealed a systematic error in Bernstein's
technique .
A sounder method is to calculate segment weights from segment volumes
as percentages of total body volumes, correcting for density. The volume
measurement technique described most frequently in the literature is under-
water displacement, but other methods exist and the use of stereophotogram-
metry is a promising new tool for measuring the mass distribution properties
of the living body.
The majority of subjects used thus far have been males; only a few
studies of females have ever been conducted. Presented in Table 17 are
the data for segment volumes as percentages of total body volume for mal„
cadavers and living subjects; comparable data for living female subjects
appear in Table 18. It should be remembered that different segmentation
planes for the upper arm and upper leg for cadavers and living subjects
(see Figure 2) affect the results of calculations for the relevant limbs
as well as for the torso. When the average segment volume percentages of
IV-36
e
^
'■O
o«
QO
^-^
'-
r>
<N
p*
n
^
nO
*n
m
tn
>C
r^
-*, m
QO
<N
<N
o
CO
o
-tf
-*
(N
tTl
4
(N
%o
P^
<r
-t
o
tn
nJ
r^
^ w
1-N
o
<r
tN
p^i
^
^
^
^_,
c
w
w
r»
s
rt
g
OD
O
in
S
S
0^
O
f ""
r*
PiN
-I
s
(M
:^
»rt
^
<M
CN
^
o
■J
Ov
>»
fn
'^
i
^
^
*
*n
n
^
o
^
H
s
r-
o
tn
s
nO
2
*»
fn
3
fSI
o
o^
>j
-»
n
^
oo
CM
00
(^
r«-
pg
«n
OS
s
n
n
00
•
to
8
n
•
en
<N
oo
tn
tn
-J
tn
•
O
•
«o -a- CM <-"«-• o
I
CM
«
«
m
00
CM
CM
CM
o
^-«.
e
•J'
o
CM
CM
o
so
00
•^
O
fO
m
m
fM
OS
$
oo
-3-
CO
CM
^
•n
CM
<£>
CT>
>£>
C>4
m
s
o
CM
•
eg
CM
OO
m
•
CM
r-
OO
oo
CM
CM
m
•
•
O
:^
fr> .~t .-I f-l O .-«
3
$
o
g
so
<n
n
<0
o
CO
CM
o>
CM
tn
OS
CM
to
C?
OS
o
o
I*
•-•
OS
CM
<n
eo
so
O
<n
00
so
CO
r*
fi
tn
CM
o
CM
CM
r^
00
•o
CM
CM
m
s
CM
Os
•
OS
CM
est
o
m
•
en
m
CM
m
O
CM
o
tn
OS
so
so
OS
•
§
«
tn
OS
CM
CM
o
§
so
OS
<o
00
CM
CM
OS
so
r^
<!■
r-
o
so
<r
o
CM
r*
o>
00
O
>o
<M
«)
s
OS
(^
tn
r-
•n
»n
CO
so
sO
cn
CM
^
o
o«
^
r^
m
f-i
-^
w
w
w
tn
Cs«
^
NO
v^
^
^
c.
.^
3 2
00 CM i-l
•" * s
5 g-
'J^-tootnt^p*'^^^
00 r* tN o
• • • •
tn ^ ^ ^
O 00 ^
tn -nT o
• • •
Os tn to
S
t $ t
ah lA
S I i;
I I
e e
Reproduced (rom
best available copy-_
IV- 3 7
TABLE 17
MALE SEGMENT VOLUME AS PERCENT OF TOTAL BODY VOLUME
Subjects
Cadaver
Living
Studies
Clauser
et al.
(1969)
Chandler
et al.
(1975)
Average
Dempster
(1955)
Cleaveland
(1955)
Drillis
et al.
(1966)
Katch &
Ualtman
(1975)
Average
Head
5.4X
Head & neck
7.0%
7.0Z
7.4%
7.2%
Torso
48.1
46.2
47.2
Neck & torso
51.9
56.9
54.4%
Upper arm
2.6
2.7
2.7
3.5%
3.1
3.5%
3.4
Forearm
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.6
Upper & forearm
4.1
4.2
4.2
5.0
4.7
5.2
5.6
5.1
Hand
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.6
Total arm
4.7
4.7
4.7
5.6
5.2
5.8
6.3
5.7
Thigh
10.3
9.4
9.9
14.2
11.2
9.2
11.5
Shank
4.2
3.6
3.9
4.9
4.4
4.1
4.5
Thigh & shank
14.5
13.0
13.8
19.1
15.6
13.3
15.2
15.8
Foot
1.4
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.7
1.4
Total leg
15.9
14.1
15.0
20.5
16.9
14.6
16.9
17.2
Total body
100. IX
99.9%
100.0%
99.3%
100.0%
N
13
6
-
39
12
11
24
Stature*
172.7
172.1
172.4
174.5
175.8
176.0
176.9
175.8
Weight*
65.6
65.17
65.4
75.6
71.5
73.42
76.2
73.9
Age
49.3
54.3
51.9
20.6
27.2
20.8
21.2
22.5
TB volume*
62.99
69.61
66.3
71.32**
66.73
69.26**
71.89**
69.8
*Stature is reported in centimeters, weight in kilograms and total body volume in liters.
**Total body volume computed as weight '■ 1.06.
IV-38
TABLE 18
FEMALE SEGMENT VOLUME AS PERCENT OF TOTAL BODY VOLUME
Head & neck
Torso
Upper torso
Lower torso
Upper arm
Lower arm
Upper & lower arm
Hand
Thigh
Thigh & shank
Foot
N
Katch & Weltman
Kjeldsen
(1975)
(1972)
8.37o
8.8%
(50.7%)
16.4%
34.3%
2.8%
1.4%
4.57o
(4.2%)
0.6%
0.5%
9.4%
15.4%
(14.4%)
1.6%
1.2%
23
12
total body volume are conpared with the percentages for weight, the differ-
ences are small, reflecting the close correlation between volume and weight.
Thus, to estimate segment weight, the percentages from either Table 17
or Table 18 can be used. To estimate segment volume, regression equations
appearing in Appendix B, Table 4 can also be used.
If segment volume is available for an individual or for a population,
the density data in Table 19 will provide the necessary values for estimat-
ing weight from volume. These values are based on cadaveric data and have
the same bias which is present in the actual segment weights of cadavers.
Therefore, whether segment weights for astronauts are estimated via regres-
sion equations or measured segment volume, the engineer must assume that
cadaver data is only an approximation of these properties in the living body.
The accuracy with which these data reflect living body weight distribution is
essentially unknown, but they are the best approximations available.
Moments of Inertia
This section will serve as a guide to the inertial properties of
the whole body and its segments. Its purpose is to present the available
empirical data for estimating moments of inertia and to present methods
of estimating these properties for specific populations.
The inertial properties of the whole body and its segments have
been reported in a variety of ways: as moments of inertia; as a momental
ellipsoid of inertia; and as an inertia tensor. All three describe the
IV- 3 9
TABLE 19
SEGMENT DENSITY TOR MALE CADAVERS
(Values in grams/cm^)
Dempster
Clauser
Chandler
Average
(1955)
et al.
(1969)
et al.
(1975)
1.06
Head
1.06
Head & neck
1.11
1.07
1.09
Torso.
Neck & torso
1.02
0.85
0.94
Head, neck, & torso
1.03
1.03
1.03
Upper arm
1.07
1.06
1.00
1.04
Lower arm
1.13
1.10
1.05
1.09
Hand
1.16
1.11
1.08
1.12
Thigh
1.05
1.04
1.02
1.04
Shank
1.09
1.08
1.07
1.08
Foot
1.10
1.08
1.07
1.08
inertial properties of an individual
tions or data analysis methods.
but are based on different assuitp-
Moments of
in most studies,
but occasionally
of rotation. All
ing through cente
measured moments o
by the researcher
six or more axes
which was used to
pal axes of inertia
inertia are defined about an axis of rotation which,
is defined as passing through the center of gravity,
is defined as passing through an estimated joint center
the moments reported in this section are about axes pass-
rs of gravity. In the studies of living subjects, the
f inertia are reported about three orthogonal axes defined
. In recent studies using cadaver specimens, moments about
were measured in order to determine an inertial tensor
derive the principal moments of inertia about the princi-
As with other mass distribution properties, data on the whole body
are obtained primarily from measurements of living subjects and data on
segments come primarily from measurements of cadavers. A comparison has
been made on the following pages which will clarify the differences between
methods used in studies of cadavers and that used in the study of living
subjects.
Whole Body
Measurements of whole body moments of inertia are position-dependent
data since they describe the mass distribution in a particular position
assumed by the subject during the measurement procedure. As soon as any
IV- 40
of the segments change position, the magnitude and direction of the moments
of inertia are changed. The only reasonable approach for data on the whole
body is to measure moments of inertia for common positions of the body.
Three such studies, covering a range of positions for the maments of inertia
relative to an inertial "anatomical" axis system located at the center
of gravity of the living body, have been undertaken.
The first direct measures of moments of inertia of the whole body
were made by Santschi et al . (1963) on 66 subjects representative of the
U.S. Air Force flying personnel. Using a conpound pendulum with the body
in the eight positions depicted in Figure 9, investigators measured three
moments of inertia about three axes passing through the center of gravity
of the body. The data, summarized in Table 20, give the moments of inertia
for U.S. males and include regression equations which predict the moments
of inertia about an "anatomical" axis system defined by the intersection
of the three cardinal anatomical planes with an origin at the center of
gravity for the whole body (See Figure 1).
Table 21 presents values computed from the regression equations
in Table 20 for small, medium and large white males in the standing, sit-
ting and relaxed (weightless) positions. These estimates are appropriate
for the U.S. white male population projected for 1985 as are the following
data from DuBois.
Using the same measurement techniques, DuBois et al . (1964), enlarged
on the Santschi study by measuring three moments of inertia about the same
axes on 19 male subjects wearing full-pressure suits. The subjects assumed
only two positions (sitting and relaxed) but were measured in three dress
conditions: nude, unpressurized suit, and pressurized suit (See Figure
10). The suit sizes ranged from small-regular to extra-large-long. Table
22 presents the summary statistics and regression equations and Table 23
contains values computed from the regression equations in Table 22.
There has been one French study in which the inertial properties
of living subjects were measured. Ignazi et al. (1972) measured three
moments of inertia on eleven standing male subjects using a method similar
to that used in the U.S. studies. Table 24 presents the summary statistics
for height, weight, and the moments of inertia for the x- , y- and z-axes
as well as multiple regression equations for predicting the moments of
inertia and center of mass from anthropometric dimensions. This study repre-
sents the only source of whole body inertial information on European sub-
jects.
The above-described studies are based on the assumption that the
"anatomical" axis system (as depicted in Figure 1) reasonably approximates
the principal axes of inertia. The basic difference between them is that
the "anatomical" axis system is a hypothetical construction imposed on
the body by the investigator while the principal axes of inertia are inher-
ent in the body or its parts. The former is unaffected by the dynamics
of the body while the latter change as the body configuration and mass
distribution change in time and space.
IV- 41
H
e
o
o o g
C* K *
m mi •
W PJ o
I I I
s ^ 9
CM Q fM
f) ^ r*
m -a r*
• • •
o o o
+ + -K
(O «g «
r^ M ^
r- >» o
• • •
«n PI o
I
o o ■*
• • «
to e4 •-*
I I +
9 9 »
R <P -»
m oo o>
<o m o
• • •
o o o
+ 4 +
m
CO 10 m
<o <r <o
«n n o
o oo "^ o •
m o <-"
<ft r- O
n «s •"•
3 S V
K <0 ^
r* t-* o»
<o in i-"
• • •
o o o
+ + +
<0 CO CO
m O <M
<o CI in
•■4 m CM
^ «n m
» 22
<s » -J
«M "O O
l»> CM CM
• • •
o o o
+ + +
CO <o CO
<n >o <o
^ CM r-
i^Of^ «>«M-* «noO
•«. ••• ''^
«0 r- en
r* fNi in
fn CM o
3:22 a
O CM O
cn cn CM
• • •
o o o
+ + +
(O
CO CO m
o> m <o
p< O r-
• • •
•-< CM O
■4 m >(}
a> r* -»
' > 2
eo eo ^*
en <-'
• • •
o o o
4 + +
CO CO ap
r» m *
m «o «
f-i CO o
CM <-• CM
• • •
o o o
+ + +
(O CO CO
en •« CO
^ «n CM
m ■* <n
OOO f^CMO ^^CMO
O O f**
• • •
<o 0> r«
o «^ •*
s V at
CM CM <e
m m r»
-* m ^^
• • •
OOO
+ + +
CO CO w
r* <n r*
r- -» r»
g
O* M
u\ CO I-
• I •« m
I
S!
•» CM
CM CO
m <o o
CO <o o>
0> 0> CO
O m ■*
• • •
CO r- >o
o> >o <n
0> <0 Q
r- <o o
in « •) ^ -» -»
r- o^ «o r» in m
• • • • • •
en '4 •-• en ■» "^
CO « en
o^ 0^ »
000 000 000 000
n M en o> CM
■H Ol • • •
u tl o> r> CM
b CO) •-< »<
en ^ CO
• • •
O m* m
»< CM r«
o> » o>
r- O o>
• • •
o> CM m
o> r» CM
CO c^ 9»
000
O CO f-l
en -* <0
o^ o> o^
en O "O
• • •
o -9 m
<o •» <o
ov o> o>
en en ^
• • •
€n <^ m
eCl 00<^ OO"-! OO'eo ^<o<n
BCN men-e cMr-»< ^^<0 •i'SC!
Sxl ^ o '^ men»< ini-»en <o<oen
CM CO en
« «> en
» CO <o
en en CM
tfi m ■*
»o r* en
CM CO m
9> 00 en
M >« H M >> I
e •
M>sN X^M M>>M K>>H M>>H
9
M
M O
«
a
(O
ct
e
ea
c
(0 4
M V
M a
(O CI
c
8
>»
3
O B
b o
«l 1-1
X V
w
•-4
4J
«
CI
9
•-4
«l
^ I
« --
c -e
CI •
Ou -^
Ok u
< m
>
•
• u
• c
. ^
■ B
i! JL
B «
3 •«
B
X 'H
«
X •
% 5
£
«J w
B 12
Q
•S <J
s •&
•1 -H
> •
6 »
8 -0
B
U e«
& s
3
4J
CM* a
• M
U
«l U
•
•
C W
•H B
• 41
x> -^
mt
•H
B w
•H «
•1
B
W U
>
-* B
M
10
•H
CI «
«l 4J
•s-g
u n
m r*
B 3
«
b
- g.
M K
B
u 8
•H B
•*4
^N
IM CI
•1 .-»
rH
u u
: 5-
3-&
3 4J
a -H
«^ ^4
u «
^ 5
CO 3
IV- 42
Reproduced from
best ava;lable_copy^
o
c ^
•ri rO C*^
c
CM
w
P3
<
H
o
g
Q
&
3
O
o
CO
Ci]
H
<t lO
x:
p~ ^
4J
^^ CM
lO
s-^
O
• •
• •
g^
(U
00
vo P~
h
• •
<8
00 r-
hJ
00 ON
I,
u
in
•
C
I
•
43
r~
CO
o
m
O
en
vO
vO
1— t
vf
en
ITI
u-i
vO
r~
OO
r~
r»
o
o-
tn
<7<
vt
•3-
00
vO
vO
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CJv
o
oo
>3-
CM
vO
00
CM
vr
r^
vO
t-l
ON
O
lO
en
f^
m
iri
r>.
00
vO
00
en
p»
m
o
<r
00
CM
r~
.-1
-*
CM
en
m
en
00
CVJ
c^
VO
ON
oo
en
en
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
oo
r-l
yO
en
o
ON
CM
r^
00
U-I
o-
.-(
oo
ON
-*
CM
1— 1
-t
«— 1
.-1
1-1
«-H
o
C J^
CM O
g>
^
o o
u
r« oo
o
s^ .-1
CM
m
N-/
•
• •
0)
••
E 00
<n
f=
O ^
•
3
C
1-1
-^ m
1-1
•o
• «
1
(U
oo ^
•
z
r~ 00
XI
.-1
.-1
NO
o
i-i
»-S ,^-N
X
• •
s^
C J3
CM
•H <-l
e
(U
u
CM
m
cn
en
i-t
-d-
00
CJN
00
on
r~-
en
1^
ON
en
en
lO
vt
1— 1
•-H
en
-d-
CM
m
NO
cn
o
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
f-H
NO
-J-
U1
•-I
f-i
CM
r»
vt
-a-
CM
1—1
r-
OO
•^
1-1
o
-*
o-
nO
»o
nO
CN
CM
^
NO
lO
.— 1
00
r~
<r
ON
en
NO
■J-
un
oo
lO
NO
r~
00
r-
t-H
o>
C7N
•
•
•
•
■
•
•
•
•
<r
•-I
CM
NO
f— 4
NO
ON
•vt
00
CM
.-1
t—l
NO
r^
cn
CJN
ON
en
ii^°
NO en
NO -a-
^
1-^ 1-1
4J
v_^
u-1
• •
• •
B^
1— 1
f-l
CM CM
«
• •
P.
OO ITl
tn
vO nO
g,
U-I
o
O
r-
o
r--
c^
o
•vT
>o
00
00
oo
p~
<■
r~
CM
1—1
o
r~
t—*
1^
o
00
o
ON
en
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
en
1—1
o
u-(
o
ON
NO
1-1
cn
o
CJN
1-1
m
NO
CM
OO
00
cn
on
CO
m
r-
<t
NO
NO
00
CM
<r
NO
O
en
CM
ON
CM
-*
vO
i-H
1-1
O
en
1—1
cn
1-1
<r
-a-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1—1
t-i
ON
ON
en
NO
NO
CM
ON
ON
00
<t
U-I
CM
r~
r~-
CM
00
c
1-1
T3
C
CO
X >N N
00
c
5>^ N
0)
06
c
01
<
V
0)
in
c
3
u
<u
Ji
4J
O
O
c
o
lH
in
u
>
c
o
u
u
o
IV-43
Nude
Unpresaurized
1. Sitting
Pressiirized
T-^
Nude
Unpressurized
Pressurized
2. Relaxed (Weightless)
Figure 10. Mean centers of gravity in nude and suited subjects (from DuBois
et al., 196A).
IV-A4
e
o
o o
*»
o
o
m
o o
^
o
O O
O O
o
O
O
r*
^
•
•
•
•
•
•
«
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
«
•
4j
m tn o
^
^
ff»
o
r-
oo
f^
m
«>
r^
f*-
-»
00
-»
3
K
O <^
^
w*
oo
r*
M
in
r-»
Ox
« •»
Ox
^
m
o
m
3
f-4 ^
f^
^
•-I
»H
^^
N
r^
C^l
CM
CM
e
5
III.
S3S
s
1
CM
1
1
1
s
•-I
3
3S
gS3
w <}
•-4
n
« CM
eo
OO
m
•o
tn
r-
O
>-4
m to
^M
m
n n
<M
m
m
CM
CM
en
CM
in
■3
CM
m
»n
CM
m
«»
CM
fl
m
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
O
•
«
o o
O
o
o
o
o o o
o
O
o
o
o
O
o
o
o
^
V
V
06
+ +
*
+ + +
+ + +
+ +
*
+ +
*
+ +
*
^
^
to to
to
to
to
to
3
to
vt
CO
r*
to
to
to
to
o
e
«
CTt o
N
CM
>o
ox
>o
r»"
flO
-»
«
ox
ox
s
CM
00
CM
V
^
o
«n ^
OX
00 t^
o
o
m o
00
o
to
^4
m
>»
•-«
r*
Q>
M
• •
•
•
•
•
«
•
•
Ou
<S
.-t CM
o
1-^
CM
^-t
CM
CM
i-t
<N
-» o
<n
fO
o
m
-»
o
■<
«
(0
>
u
e
«
OB
s
4J
r- r^
r*-
CM
r*
p*
^ (^
en
o o
in
CM
00
fO
r^
^
xO
c
•o
^ O
»H
^
r-
•a-
•
CM
•
•
•n
r^
*o
p*
•
n
•
ox
-*
en
3
c
cM-^^-i cncM^^ mm^H
*n -sT <-* ■4- «* ^
ooo ooo ooo
ooo ooo ooo
4J ^
c »
O 4J
(0 00
ootTiin ox^4in QOv^m
•"tfmin mmm mm-^'
i
€nm<n moo^o oo^o
cMoorij oo<M oo»-<
K>^H X>sH X>N<>
X>^M X^M X>%M
C o
« u •
> ■ •
■rf c • ■
W O J= 'O
■.< iJ c
•> u c a
m -> a,
u c
O >< 'H C
u 3 "a^^
o u u
- js 3-a
■ o. a ^
« 'H u «
9 4i ca S
5-S
^ z
a
e
3
> Z CA »
Reproduced from
best availabi
e copy.
IV- 45
t4
Ji
U
ON
o
• • CM
e ^ g
CO (n e
• • Eb
r-« 1-1
>-- CM CM
« 8j
eo
■J OOov
»or~. -H
r>» !*• m (n
vo r- ^ 1-1
O ^ <• 00
vo CM r~-
O r^ m
SON
m o r--
O f^ >o
o NO CM en iTi <r
m vo r« p» in n
O 'tf 1-" O en IT)
ID ON 00
CO r« in
vo i-i r»
00 00 tn
CM r» »H 1^ «* o
00 no On m r* cm
r*. 00 r** in "^ On
m »o o
o> .-* m
m m o
o> i-» >n
On On -J .-I On O
On r~ cn CM >3' r~
m NO <* m en 00
• • • • • •
en 00 i-< »* Q o
NO m in vo £ in
NO
O
• • CM
V e x> e
.-4 "H .-4 O
CM O
o
!>
o
in
1-1 -tfin
•O • •
V OOi-i
X f^oo
u
41
in
•
C
•H
I
•
U3
St 00 1^
r« <j> ^
i-» ON CM
• • •
<* m en
00 o ■*
CM CM \0
^ 0\ ^
O CM ^
• • •
in m en
00 o 'J
o r» .* NO eo m
en <-i On in cm -j
O NO r~ CM r~- o
r~ CM in
>* -* -3-
00 CM 0>
St
CM
00
CM
00
-»
CM
in
en
ON
CM
»-i
^
ON
CM
^
en
■^
•
«
•
•
•
•
<*
f-i
CO
m
^
00
r»
ON
en
c~
c^
en
«* NO >3-
m ON On CO On nO
CM O ^ O "-• en
00 CO o
2 "** Q
«n CM -5
•-I NO en
en CM «*
o
c
V
a
a,
<
4>
4)
0)
C
3
U
«
Xi
u
o
o
G
o
•H
U
U
>
C
o
*
<o
o
•-I
--S/-N »<
C jO CM
^^ g
•-I CM r~
•H • •
g^ NO en
NO <»
J3 w -^
6'*
•-I
•-4 CMCM
00 in
NO \o
I,
u
4)
10
C
I
•
XI
■* «3- >» r~ o en
O •4' -^ CO M NO
.-I !*• On >^ 00 ^
in -^ CM
CM Q "O
en NO CM
^ 00 ON
O CM o
CM O NO
CM in 00
<o r~ CM
.-I i-i in
t-l l>~ NO
ON On m
• • •
si- NO in
m NO CM
»3- m ON
nO r» CM
CM r- m
in sf CO
r~ O f^
• • •
\0 r- in
m NO CM
ON in en o "* en
O O en •-• O en
CM O On
nO r« o
NO «n 5
• • •
vO en ON
On On CM
ON 0> NO
en r~ i-i
vt o> r~
• • •
r— •-! On
On ON CM
X >^ t* X >N N
•o
N
U
3
«
00 0)
e h
U C
•H
CO
0)
M
•r*
u
3
8)
in
4)
X >> N X >^ N
•o
4)
N
M
3
10
to
•a 4»
0) u
4)
OS
41
N
1-1
u
3
01
10
4)
U
cm
IV-46
w
§
"*
■
r^
c
00
o
•
•H
00
4J
1-4
m
3
1
cr
u
CO
cr
e
1-4
o
•-I
•^
•
(0
o
(A
«
+
^
00
:z
V
\0
B3
fO
u-i
e>4
CO
O
+
o
CO
o
o
m
o
•
vO
4J
ON
ca
m
«
•
«
o
CO
O
Oi
o
in
n
CO
CO
<o
o<
cr
cr
•r4 •
<r
<IJ Q
cr
M •
•
01 CO
f-i
C
o
cr
CM
4J
c
s
cdl
0)1
00
CO
«9
41
^
A
«
•H
h
«
>
4J
•
c
Q
^
X
c
•H
0)
•o
o.
c
0)
•s
o.
c
o.
1-1
<
«
«
J=
0)
4J
01
JZ
«%
u
(0
1-1
4J
»
•H
c
4J
3
•S)
M
1-1
W
4)
JC
>
4J
o
c
o
«
«J
0)
c
h
o
3
•H
4J
n
«
•
V4
4J
cr
0)
>
U
0)
c
U-I
i-i
o
O
J3
u
«
iJ
H
u
o
c
0)
C
(b
1-1
1-1
o
1-1
c
•
U-I
o
CM
U-I
(0
•H
e
0)
i-i
•
00
8
0)
4-1
in
c
^
01
T-l
c
e
u
U-I
c
o
1-1
00
4)
•H
1-4
4J
o
•o
4J
c
»— 1
c
«
4)
■H
§
0)
>
I-l
0)
U
X
4J
1-1
1^
c
c
M
00
u
iH
1-1
(0
0)
8
01
^-v
I-I
u
u
lA
<0
0)
3
JZ
•H
^J
4J
00
s
(0
D.
«
1-1
01
1-1
4J
4)
3
u
CO
»
01
■-I
t-l
^
\^
0)
«
3
CO
>
X
CO
»
IV-47
Chandler et al . (1975) conducted the first study to determine the
principal moments of inertia about the principal axes of inertia in the
whole body. The subjects were six embalmed cadavers. The principal moments
of inertia are presented in Table 25 relative to a right-handed orthogonal
axis system located at the whole body center of gravity. These moments
were determined about the principal axes according to a technique described
by Winstandley et al. (1968) and further discussed in the Chandler et
al. report.
Inertial data from the Chandler study can be used to examine the
assumption that the "anatomical" axis system (about which the three previous
investigators measured their data) approximates the principal axes of iner-
tia. This "anatomical" axis system has been treated as an inertial frame
of reference defined in the standard anatomical position. The axis system
about which the principal moments of inertia in the Chandler study were
determined, defines the momental ellipsoid of inertia (Synge and Griffith,
1942). Table 26 presents a comparison of the Chandler data with data from
the Santschi study for subjects individually matched for height and weight.
In general, the percentage differences are small for the principal
moments of inertia in the standing position indicating that the "anatomical"
axis system closely approximates the principal axes of the momental ellipsoid
of inertia in that position. It will be noted that the z-axes in the sitting
position are significantly different. These differences are attributed
to the displacement of the appendages away from the cardinal anatomical
planes. As a general rule for symmetrical displacements of the appendages
relative to the torso, moments of inertia about the x-axis and y-axis will
most closely approximate the principal moments of inertia measured about
the "anatomical" axis. The z-axis will have the poorest approximation since
it is the major axis of the ellipsoid and hence the most sensitive."' The
two studies by Chandler et al. (1975) and Becker (1972) in which moments
of inertia were measured about principal axes result in more reliable data
except for unresolved differences between them concerning head data.
All available data were measured under one-g conditions and therefore
incorporate the effect of gravity on the tissues and fluids of the body.
Although some raw data on inertial properties under zero-g conditions have
been collected, they have not been analyzed, so there are, as yet, no
guidelines for adjusting values for moments of inertia in the zero-g
environment .
*The magnitude of the axes in a momental ellipsoid is given by the square
root of the inverse of a moment of inertia. Therefore, for a typical ellip-
soid, the major axis passes through the centroid and a point on the surface
defined by a tangent to the greatest rate of curvature. Therefore the major
axis is the most sensitive to minor changes in the mass distribution of
the body.
IV-48
«a- o
o^ •*
r* ^
a
Vi
•
CM -^
in ^o
• •
>A CM
0« OO
•-• yO
9- 00
r*
^ CM
•*.'
m en
CM
^ CM
O r-
O r;
O O
X
n
in 00
■ •
CM r-
• •
yO o
00 m
CM m
m 00
^ 00
*o -»
.-1 "^
en 'C
CO m
p- -J-
sO
• •
m r^
• •
en
1 9>
sO
CM
1 r*
m
CM
1 00
M
o
00 flO
vO sO
1 ^
1 •
• s
1 •
C
im'
■H
4J
4J
•r4 ^^
m
«o r*
O o
* •
00 -J
• •
*n
CM
1 ^
. s
m
1 -*
00 «
m CM
/^
1 •
1
1 p*
1-1
»— '
■^6
1
«
C
CM CM
in
en
00
»n
m
m
^
• •
CT» CM
« •
o
1 oo
CM
1 o
00
1 <n
eo
°s
1-1 >^
X
«
u
u
1
■ s
! «
1 ^
.-1
•1
4)
■s
c
c
^
^^
M
r»
00
2
•o
W^ 00
00
•M
CM
00
eo
i
^^ m
CM m
O
•-•
00
en
r^
r»
0> so
^ «o
«
CT- 1
•-< 1
• 1
CM 1
-J'
00 ^
r«. >o
4J
« 1
-» 1
CM 1
^H
^^ ■«->■
c
o-i
•-»
c
1
3
8.
4J
m
•rt
o.
»
lO p-<
>3-
u
s
CM
(A
-- o
r^ m
c
03
»n
-3-
l4
■a CM
• •
•v4
1
1
^ 1
»»
c
•o
•o r^
•-• •-•
b
O 1
m 1
r»- 1
4J
«
>7
r- «
00 r-
a«
in 1
CM 1
•-4 1
V
e
4J
•-t
«1
c
4*
5
4
<n
«o
p-
m
>»
^
• •
oo o
3 .
CM
CM 1
sO 1
1
<n
00 o^
r^ yO
1
1
1
>c
in CM
»o «
00 1
cr- 1
•-• 1
t^
0^
00
«-<
00
'^^
o
- M
c
*-\
*-s
^^
W y-H
00 >->
00 y^
^
c -o
c -o
C "O
•H «
•-< w
•^ tl
c
■a u
•O 4J
-O 4J
«
c «
c «
c <a
>
« «
a «
« 0)
4i
•|C
4J CA
4J V)
U Vi
QO
U
-K
«
tn w
tf) ^^
to >-'
V
4J
h
«
X
3
*J
Ji
00
4J
m
3
w
M
M
>*
N
o
Vl
00
41
4J
X
>*
N
«
<
3
W)
*~*
M
»-<
IV-49
Sitting
4/26
5/16
6/39
14. 6r/,
4.157.
10.767,
-3.037,
-5.167.
-10.547,
TABLE 26
COMPARISON OF MOMENTS OF INERTIA BETWEEN CHANDLER ET AL. (1975)
AND SANTSCHI ET AL. (1963)
Standing
Subject # 1/19 2/1 3/17
Ix* -4.057. 0.847, 7.047,
ly* -2.697, -7.17/, 2.827,
Iz* 18.107, 14.947, 21.427, -183.337, -91.957, -107.597,
*Deviation as percent of cadaver value.
Segments
Table 27 presents a summary of the data from four cadaver studies.
Although the sample sizes are too small to permit definitive conclusions
for the population, these are the only data of their kind available and
may be used with caution. It should also be noted vrtien using this table
that some differences between the samples are attributable to differing
definitions of the segments and the resultant variations in segment mass.
As can be observed from the table, Chandler et al . (1975) and Beck-
er (1972) measured the principal moments of inertia about three principal
axes of inertia. The results of both studies confirm that, for our purposes,
moments of inertia about the "anatomical" axes closely approximate the
principal moments of inertia determined about the principal axes of inertia
for body segments.
For the modeler, there are three approaches which can be used to
predict the principal moments of inertia of body segments. Table 28 pre-
sents the first and simplest approach by providing coefficients from the
data in the Chandler study for the radii of gyration (K = I/M) expressed
as a ratio, or percentage, of segment length. To estimate the radius of
gyration, multiply the segment length (or link length) by the appropriate co-
efficient found . in Table 28. The resulting product is multiplied by the
appropriate segment weight (see Table 13) to obtain the principal moments of
inertia for each segment. Table 29 presents some sample calculations for
small (5th percentile), medium C50th percentile) and large (95th percentile)
1985 males.
The torso in Table 28 corresponds to the segmentation plan followed
in the Chandler study which combined the neck, thorax, abdomen and pelvis
segments into one. Geometric models, based on segment weight estimates
in Table 15, can be used to calculate inertial properties of these four
segments.
IV-50
o
X
B
S
E
3
-J
CO
>o
CM
u-i
m
cn
<n
cn
1
N
o^
CT«
00
CO
8
8
CM
z
u-i
m
m
J
1
1
04
U
>
(0
tn
cn
«n
■0
OO
■0
r^
00
cn
9-
>v
-»
a
tO
in
■*in
'cm
-^
<r
en
r-
^
1
r*
9
X
•-t
cr
u-i
(M
CM
tn
OO
CM
en
-*
m
CM
cn
1
m
41
m
^__
u
in
C3
1
,
1
,
1
1
h.
^
1
[
1
00
1
1
c^
^
1
1
1
1
1
1
iO
M
1
•
'
1
'^
CM
'
1
i
'
'
'
«
^
c
3
u
ta
V
u
n
s
*
«
8
i
>>
1
r-
1
1
[
"
"
s
CM
-J
00
r^
^^
so
flO
1
^
1
1
(M
-*
CD
m
r*
m
cn
1
-»
PH
•«
a>
CM
CM
oT
^
h
>.
•»
P
tn
t
X
M
i
i
0*
m
■d'
§
s
i
•
•
cn
CM
s
ao^
-a
•*
CM
OO
a
N
>o
N
1
CM
1
-"H
CM
O^
>^
CM
>.
b
M
CNJ
i
i
i
i
i
i
^
i
§
£
g
£
£
CM
tn
1
w
CN
'J
^
u
«
n
s
in
>^
M
0*
~
tn
cn
1
1
to
o^
^
-»
JJ
a-
'^
(D
CO
>£>
-^
r-
0-
m
^
-o
tn
M
CM
CN
V
OO
(N
^
<»
CM
c^
00
rZ
p!
1
1
1
r-
f«4
CM
CM
CM
CM
1
tn
tsi
CM
«n
o>
^
.
m
«
?;
■d-
r^
.r;
m
tn
CT*
(M
00
%o
cn
4J
■-*
-»
co
CM
-J'
m
%o
U-I
r-
0^
S
V
«
*n
tn
«
xO
m
CM
0*
CD
m
CM
cn
en
J
■■^
•-^
w
•0
c
«
J=
s
-
a*
r;
•n
CO
^
<r
m
cn
l-t
2
m
CM
\0
<T
.^
m
r^
«
n
m
<o
«
B
»n
<7»
C7V
cn
tn
1
'
,
,
,
^
.
.
4J
4J
4J
4J
4J
4-1
4J
U
BC
-J
oc
^
K
^
w
nJ
ac
*J
06
^
M
s
e
u
u
«
w
c
iJ
•0
m
«
s
s
«
a.
a
•0
S
X
•5,
m
JZ
4J
1
•0
m
«
X
•0
•0
n
•
X
-a
e
e ^
£ £
IV- 51
TABLE 28
THE RADIUS OF GYRATION (K) AS A PERCENT OP SEGMENT LENGTH
L K/L
Head x Head length 31.6%
y 30.9%
z 34.2%
Torso X Torso length 43.07o
y ( Suprasternale hgt. 35.27<,
z -trochanterion hgt.) 20.87o
Upper arm x Acrotnion-radiale 1. 26.17o
y 25.4%
z 10.4%
Forearm x Radiale-stylion 1. 29.6%
y 29.2%
z 10.8%
Hand x Hand breadth 50.4%
y 45.6%
z 26.6%
Thigh X Trochanterion hgt. 27.9%
y -fibular hgt. 28.4%
z 12.2%
Shank X Fibular hgt. 28.2%
y 28.2%
z 7 . 67o
Foot X Foot length 26.1%
y 24.9%
z 12.2%
A second method of predicting the principal moments of inertia is
to use regression equations based on body weight, segment weight or segment
volume. These equations were computed in the Chandler study and are given
in Appendix B, Table 5. The same segmentation plan as that used in Table
28 must be followed but the equations are based on a slightly different
set of independent data.
A third method by which a design engineer can estimate the principal
moments of inertia of body segments is to use geometric models. There are
several current models which utilized geometric estimates, including those
developed by Bartz and Gianotti (1973), Hanavan (1964) and Tieber and Linde-
muth (1965). These models share some common assumptions which are well
known but are not inherent in the two previously reported methods. First,
IV- 5 2
c ^
V
1^ t-t
^
•H
m fo
»4
• •
00
•* m
pg
Ji
r^ i-i
U
>-* CM
Cd
<o
v^
>J
Ov
• •
H
«•
8^
01
Z
eo
\o r^
M
u
• •
CO
00 r~
V3
>:)
00 o>
CO O O^
•-< o •*
<M CN CM
• • •
o o o
fi.-io^ r~»of»i fooio
^Sl-.-t O0\fn rH^i-l
00>m <M<-IO rHi-tO
O^CM»» ooo ooo ooo
<^ o fo m o "^
ooo o ^ en
CM CM o
CM CM r<.
lO ir> ^
« vO O
o> 'J- n
m m .-I
ooo
ooo ooo
CO r~ m
cMO^n r~c«^<-i vOcMO nr^'O o^inm o»o^ln
CM CO
CM CM CM
r- CM o* CO .-1 r~
en n o CO CM on
00 >0 ^ CM CM
f-t •* ir»
CM ^
CM CM
-* o >o
CO .-( vt
CO ^ ^
CM CM
>0 \0 CO
CO CO lA
\o >o u*i
vO Q •*
>o >o <-i
« c ^
CM O
O O
r* 00
O s,/ i-i
co<oco cMco^ r~o»co oovoo
r«<oo 000000 -d'cocM p«r«»t-t
t-<>-itM OOO^t-i »-<t-<o OOO
O* 00 CO ^ r»- CM
O Q O r> CM 00
OOO -J IT) CM
tn m <T vo CM o
r- r-» CO vj- <t t-<
-* >3- O OOO
OOO f-i-H^ OOO OOO OOO ^^O
ooo ooo
u
■J
s
60
a CM.
*o • •
0) 00 •-•
2 1^ 00
1^
r-CMCO CMCMO OCMCO
m •-< 00
in r-- o»
0» 00 CM
^ I-I (S
O' O r^
fl <t c^
CM m r»-
O CO «*
CM •-<
vO r~ vo
•fi m CM
00 <0 1-1
CO 00 i-l
^ m ov
O OO CM
vO 00 t~-
CO CO flO •-• -* -^
O vO 00
vO CM I-l
*0 l~- CO
-3- -a- 00
cO CO CO
IT, UO
CM r>- I-l
u-1 <J- •-<
CM
C U3
I-l CM r» XI
>4
u
O CO
O^ fO CO
CO CO \0
>o m CM
^ m CM
ov >o o
00 00 vO
0< 00 ^
OOO
I-l o f^
«n «ri o
OOO
r» lO CM
OOO
OOO
!? O p
W* CO CT^
c^ o ^
r-- r- St ID CM 00
CM CM CM CO CO O
CO CO o ooo
ooo cMfloco ooo ooo ooo 0«-'0
ooo ooo
—• CM CM
(O
60 0«
o^ooo ou^io f-io»>o r-.i-it»«
• •
1
vO O CO
00 m
M
in m CO
>o «o
Ai
I-l f-H i-l
•^ vo r-
Soo i-t
-3- 0» CO
.-I CT> r- r— ^o r>-
I-l o> I-l in m
•d- I-l I-l
r~ >o CM
o\ m ON
CO to 00 i-< m 00
<o vr -*
CM vO I-l
^ I-l CM
^ ON vO
\0 vO CM
CO CO
\0 00
(O
X >» N
X :>N N
X >. N
X >» N
X :>» N X >N N
X P^ N
X >N N
g
•o
S
M
u
V
o
X
H
0)
3
A
41
U
O
g
-a
•H
H
a
4J
O
O
IV-53
geometric models assume rigid homogeneous bodies of unknown density usually
estimated to be 1.0. Second, they assume the shape of these bodies to be
best approximated by symmetrical geometric shapes. As a consequence, they
further assume that the principal "geometric" axes are the same as the
principal "inertial" axes. Based on empirical data collected thus far,
the last assumption appears to have some validity although it must be pointed
out that the only comparison presently possible is between data collected
on six embalmed cadavers and the geometric models.
The first two methods described above are derived from directly
measured data which suggests that they are more accurate and more individual-
ized than the older method which relies on geometric models. However, compu-
ter programs, which do exist for the geometric models, have not yet been
written for the newer empirical equations, so the ultimate decision concern-
ing which method to employ must be made by the user who will examine his
requirements and select accordingly.
The reader of this chapter will have noted, perhaps with some impa-
tience, the number of reservations and cautionary statements surrounding
much of the material presented here, the number of alternative approaches
offered and the frequency with which the lack of hard data has been pointed
out. This is an inevitable consequence of any attenpt to assemble a usable
and up-to-date body of knowledge in an area in which verified data are still
so sparse and in which so much research and validation remains to be done.
We are still on the frontiers of understanding the inertial properties of
the human body.
Nevertheless, despite the limitations and deficiencies of the pub-
lished data, material in this chapter provides the user for the first time
with a means of estimating the mass distribution properties of the human
body from empirical data rather than solely from the traditional geometrical
models. This is a major step toward a fuller understanding of the biomechani-
cal behavior of the human body.
IV- 54
REFERENCES
Allum, J. H. J., and L. R. Young 1976. "The Relaxed Oscillation
Technique for the Determination of the Moment of Inertia of Limb
Segments," J. Biomech . . 9(l):21-26.
Backman, G. 1924. "Korperlange and Tageszeit," Upsala Lakar . Forhandl . ,
29:255-282.'
Barter, J. T. 1957. Estimation of the Mass of Body Segments . WADC-TR-
57-260, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force
Base, Ohio.
Bartz,J. A., and C. R. Gianotti 1973. A Computer Program to Generate
Input Data Sets for Crash Victim Simulations . Calspan Report ZQ-
5167-v-l, Calspan Corp., Buffalo, New York.
Becker, Edward B. 1972. Measurement of Mass Distribution Parameters of
Anatomical Segments . Paper No. 720964, SAE Transactions, vol. 81,
sec. 4, pp. 2818-2833.
Bernstein, N. A., 0. A. Salzgeber, P. P. Pavlenko, and N. A. Gurvich
1931. Determination of Location of the Centers of Gravity and
Mass of the Links of the Living Human Body (in Russian) .
(Summarized and translated from the Russian - Bernstein, N. A. :
The Coordination and Regulation of Movements, Pergamon Press
Ltd. (Oxford, England), 1967.)
Bouisset, S., and E. Pertuzon 1968. "Experimental Determination of the
Moment of Inertia of Limb Segments," Biomechanics: Technique of
Drawings of Movement Analysis, Proceedings of the First Interna-
tional Seminar on Biomechanics , Zurich, Aug. 21-23, 1967, J.
Wartenweiler , E. Jokl, and M. Heggelinck, eds . , S. Karger (New
York, N. Y.), pp. 106-109.
Braune, W. , and 0. Fischer 1892. "Bestimmung der Tragheitsmoraente des
Mensch lichen Korpers und Seiner Glieder," Abh. d. Math. Phys .
CI. d. Wiss .. 18(8):409-492.
Braune, W. , and 0. Fischer 1889. The Center of Gravity of the Human
Body as Related to the German Infantryman , Leipzig, Germany (ATI
138 452 available from National Technical Information Service).
Chandler, R. F., C. E. Clauser, J. P. McConville, H. M. Reynolds, and
J. W. Young 1975. Investigation of Inertial Properties of the
Human Body, Final Report, Apr. 1, 1972 -Dec. 1974 . AMRL-TR-74-
137, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Dayton, Ohio.
Clauser, C. E. , J. T. McConville, and J. W. Young 1969. Weight, Volume
and Center of Mass of Segments of the Human Body . (AMRL-TR-69-
/U., Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio), NASA CR-11262.
IV-55
Cleaveland, H. G. 1955. The Determination of the Center of Gravity of
Segments of the Human Body . Dissertation, Univ. of California,
Los Angeles, Calif.
Cotton, F. S. 1931. "Studies in Centre of Gravity Changes. 1. A New
Method for Finding the Height of the Centre of Gravity in Man,
With Some Applications," Aust. J. Exper. Biol, and Med. Sci .,
8(l):53-67.
Croskey, Marguerite I., Percy M. Dawson, Alma C. Luesen, Irma E. Marohn,
and Hazel E. Wright 1922. "The Height of the Center of Gravity in
Man," Amer. J. Physiol . , 61:171-185.
Croxton, Frederick E. 1959. Elementary Statistics with Applications in
Medicine and the Biological Sciences , Dover Publ., Inc. (New York,
N.Y.J.
Dempster, Wilfred Taylor 1955. Space Requirements of the Seated
Operator . WADC-TR-55-159, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Dempster, W. T. , L. A. Sherr, and J. G. Priest 1964. "Conversion Scales
for Estimating Humeral and Femoral Lengths and the Lengths of
Functional Segments in the Limbs of American Caucasoid Males,"
Human Biology , 36(3) :246-262.
Drillis, Rudolfs, and Renato Contini 1966. Body Segment Parameters .
TR-1166.03, Engineering and Science, New York University, New
York, N.Y.
DuBois, J., W. R. Santschi, D. M. Walton, C. M. Scott, and F. W. Mazy
1964. Moments of Inertia and Centers of Gravity of the Living
Human Body Encumbered by a Full Pressure Suit . AMRL-TR-64-110,
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio.
Fenn, W. 0. 1938. "The Mechanics of Muscular Contraction in Man,"
J. Appl. Physiol . , 9:165-177.
Fenn, W. 0., H. Brody, and A. Petrilli 1931. "The Tension Developed by
Human Muscles at Different Velocities of Shortening, Amer. J.
Physiol ., 97:1-14.
Fischer, Otto 1906. Theoretical Fundamentals for a Mechanics of Living
Bodies with Special Applications to Man as Well as Some Processes
"of Motion in Machines , B. G. Teubner (.Berlin, Germany).
(ATI 153 668 available from NTIS.)
Fujikawa, Katsumasa 1963. "The Center of Gravity in the Parts of the
Human Body," Okajimos Folia Anat . Jap ., 39(3) : 117-126 .
IV-56
Geoffrey, S. P. 1961. A 2-D Mannikin - The Inside Story. X-Rays Used
to Determine a New Standard for a Basic Design Tool . Paper pre-
sented at the 1961 SAE International Congress and Exposition of
Automotive Engineering, Cobo Hall, Detroit, Mich.
Hanavan, E. P. 1964. A Mathematical Model of the Human Body . AMRL-TR-
64-102, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, Ohio (AD 608 63).
Hay, James G. 1973. "The Center of Gravity of the Human Body," Kinesi -
ology III , American Association for Health, Physical Education,
and Recreation (Washington, D.C.), pp. 20-44.
Hellebrandt, Frances A., Genevieve Braun, and Rubye H. Tepper 1937.
"The Relation of the Center of Gravity of the Base of Support in
Stance," Amer. J. Physiol ., 119:331-332.
Herron,R., J. R. Cuzzi, and J. Hugg 1976. Mass Distribution of the
Human Body Using Biostereometrics . AMRL-TR-75-18 , Aerospace
Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio.
Hill, A. V. 1940. "The Dynamic Constants of Human Muscle," Proc. Roy.
Soc , Series B, 128:263-274.
Ignazi, G. , A. Coblentz, H. Pineau, P. Hennion, and J. Prudent 1972.
"Position du Centre de Gravite Chez L 'Homme: Determination, Sig-
nification, Fonctionelle et Evolutive," Anthropologie Applique ,
43/72, Paris, France.
Katch, Victor, and Arthur Weltman 1975. "Predictability of Body Segment
Volumes in Living Subjects," Hum. Biol ., 47(2) : 203-218 .
Kjeldsen, Kirsti 1972. Body Segment Weights, Limb Lengths and the Loca-
tion of the Center of Gravity in College Women. Master ' s thesis ,
Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass.
Liu, Y. K. , and J. K. Wickstrom 1973. "Estimation of the Inertial
Property Distribution of the Human Torso from Segmented Cadaveric
Data," Perspective in Biomedical Engineering , R. M. Kenedi, ed . ,
MacMillan (New York, N.Y.), pp. 203-213.
Mori, M. , and T. Yamamoto 1959. "Die Massenanteile der Einzelnen Koper-
abschnitte der Japaner.," Acta. Anat . , 37(4) :385-388.
Page, R. L. 1974. "The Position and Dependence on Weight and Height of
the Centre of Gravity of the Young Adult Male," Ergonomics,
17(5):603-612.
Panjabi, Manohar M. , Augustus A. White, and Richard A. Brand, Jr. 1974.
"A Note on Defining Body Parts Configurations," J. Biomechanics,
7:385-387.
IV-57
Reynolds, Herbert M. , Charles E. Clauser, John McConville, Richard Chan-
dler, and Joseph W. Young 1975. Mass Distribution Properties of
the Male Cadaver . Paper presented at the Society of Automotive
Engineers Congress and Exposition, Detroit, Mich., SAE Transac-
tions 750424, p. 1132.
Santschi, W. R. , J. DuBois, and C. Omoto 1963. Moments of Inertia and
Centers of Gravity of the Living Human Body . AMRL-TDR-63-36 ,
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio.
Snyder, Richard G., Don B. Chaffin, and Rodney K. Schutz 1972. Link
System of the Human Torso, Final Technical Report, June 1970 -
July 197r ! HSRI-71, Highway Safety Research Inst., Mich. Univ. ,
Ann Arbor , Mich.
Swearingen, J. J. 1962. Determination of Centers of Gravity of Man .
Report 62-14, Civil Aeromedical Research Institute, Federal
Aviation Agency, Oklahoma City, Okla.
Synge, John L. , and Byron A. Griffith 1942. Principles of Mechanics ,
McGraw-Hill (New York, N.Y.).
Thornton, William E., G. W. Hoffler, and J. A. Rummel 1974.
"Anthropometric Changes and Fluid Shifts," Proc. of the Skylab
Life Sciences Symposium , 11:637-658, NASA TM X-58154.
Tieber, Julius A., and Robert W. Lindemuth 1965. An Analysis of the
Inertial Properties and Performance of the Astronaut Maneuvering
System . MS thesis, U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Trotter, M. , and G. Gleser 1958. "A Re-Evaluation of Estimation of
Stature Based on Measurements of Stature Taken During Life and of
Long Bones After Death," Amer. J. Phys . Anthrop ., 16( 1) : 79-124.
Walker, L. B. , Jr., E. H. Harris, and V. R. Pontius 1973. Mass, Volume,
Center of Mass and Mass Moment of Inertia of the Head and Neck of
the Human Body, Final Report" Tulane Univ., New Orleans, La. (AD-
762581).
Winstandley, W. C, T. J. Wittmann, and M. C. Eifert 1968. Special
Equipment for Measurement of Mechanical Dynamic Properties of
Emergency Escape System~ AFFDL-TR-68-8, Air Force Flight Dynam-
ics Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
IV-58
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
The following documents are not readily available because of
limited distribution (unpublished or preliminary data). However,
copies/information may be obtained by contacting the author/ source.
Damon, Albert 1964, "Diurnal Variation in Stature. Notes on
Anthropometric Technique," Amer. J. Phys. Anthrop ., 22(1): 73-78.
Harless, E. 1860. "The Static Moments of the Component Masses of the
Human Body , " Trans, of the Math-Phys. Royal Bavarian Acad, of
Sci ., 8(1,2) :69-96, 257-294. Unpublished English translation,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio (AD 47 953).
Jackson, J., R. Bond, and R. Gundersen 1975. Neutral Body Posture in
Zero-G . Skylab Experience Bulletin #17, JSC-09551, NASA Lyndon B.
Johnson Space Center, Houston, Tex.
Thomas, Daniel J., et al. 1975. Second Ad-Hoc Committee Report,
presented in San Diego, Calif.
lV-59
APPENDIX A
THE ANATOMICAL FRAMEWORK
Joint Centers of Rotation and Linkage and Axis Systems
for Body Segments
1. Joint Centers of Rotation
Head/Neck -Midpoint of the interspace between the occipital con-
dyles and the first cervical vertebra.
Neck/Thorax -Midpoint of the interspace between the 7th cervical and
1st thoracic vertebral bodies."
Thorax/
Lumbar
-Midpoint of the interspace between the 12th thoracic and
1st lumbar vertebral bodies."
Lumbar/Sacral -Midpoint of the interspace between the 5th lumbar and
1st sacral vertebral bodies."
Sternoclavi-
cular
Clavi scapular
Glenohumeral
-"Midpoint position of the palpable junction between the
proximal end of clavicle and the sternum at the upper
border (jugular notch) of the sternum." (Dempster, p.
123, 1955)
-"Midpoint of a line between the coraooid tuberosity of
the clavicle (at the posterior border of the bone) and
the acromioclavicular articulation (or the tubercle at
the lateral end of the clavicle); the point, however,
should be visualized as on the underside of the clavi-
cle. "(Dempster , p. 123, 1955)
-"Midregion of the palpable bony mass of the head and
tuberosities of the humerus; with the arm abducted about
45 relative to the vertebral margin of the scapula, a
line dropped perpendicular to the long axis of the arm
from the outermost margin of the acromion will approxi-
mately bisect the joint." (Dempster, p. 125, 1955)
*These locations are defined relative to the last and first vertebrae of each
of the major anatomical vertebrae groups. Thus, there are occasionally miss-
ing or additional vertebrae which would not change the functional definition
of these links.
IV-60
Elbow
Wrist
Hip
Knee
Ankle
-"Midpoint on a line between (1) the lowest palpable
point the medial epicondyle of the humerus, and (2) a
point 8mm above the radiale (radiohumeral junction)."
(Dempster p. 125, 1955)
-"On the palmar side of the hand, the distal wrist crease
at the palmaris longus tendon, or the midpoint of a line
between the radial styloid and the center of the
pisiform bone; on the dorsal side of the hand, the
palpable groove between the lunate and capitate bones,
on a line with metacarpal bone III." (Dempster p. 125,
1955)
-"(Lateral aspect of the hip). A point at the tip of the
femoral trochanter 0.4 inch anterior to the most later-
ally projecting part of the femoral trochanter." (Demp-
ster, p. 125, 1955)
-"Midpoint of a line between the centers of the posterior
convexities of the femoral condyles." (Dempster, p. 125,
1955)
-"Level of a line between the tip of the lateral
malleolus of the fibula and a point 5mm distal to the
tibial malleolus." (Dempster, p. 125, 1955).
2 . Body Segments; Recommended Links and Axis Systems
Head
Link: The straight line between the occipital condyle/Cl inter-
space center and the center of mass of the head.
Axis System: Formed relative to the Frankfort Plane which is the
standard anthropometric measurement position parallel to the trans-
verse (XY) plane. The Frankfort Plane (XY) is established by left
inf ra-orbitale and right and left ear holes. The YZ plane will be
perpendicular to the XY plane passing through the left and right
ear holes. The XZ-plane will be constructed as a normal to the XY
and YZ -planes passing through nasion in the mid-sagittal plane.
Thus, the point of origin will be at the mid-point of the bipor-
ion axis. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along the intersection
of the XZ- and XY-planes; the +Y axis will pass laterally along the
intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes; and the +Z-axis will pass
superiorly along the intersection of the XZ-and YZ-planes. This
axis closely approximates the system used in Chandler et al .
(1975).
Neck
Link: The straight line between the occipital condyle/Cl and C7/T1
vertebral interspace joint centers.
IV-61
Axis-System: Formed relative to the mid-sagittal plane (XZ) de-
fined by the occipital condyle/Cl and C7/T1 vertebrae interspace
centers and the most anterior chin/neck intersect point. The YZ-
plane will be constructed as a perpendicular to the XZ-plane pass-
ing through the occipital condyle/Cl and C7/T1 vertebral interspace
centers. The XY-plane will be constructed as a normal to the XZ
and YZ-planes passing through the most anterior chin/neck inter-
sect point. Thus, the point of origin will be at the intersection
of the three planes. The 4-X-axis will pass anteriorly along the
intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes; the +Y-axis will pass later-
ally along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes; and the +Z-
axis will pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ- and
YZ-planes.
Torso
Link: The straight line distance from the occipital condyle/Cl
interspace joint center to the midpoint of a line passing through
the right and left hip joint center.
Axis System: Formed relative to the mid-sagittal (XZ) plane de-
fined by suprasternale and occipital condyle/Cl interspace and the
hip joint centers midpoint. The YZ-plane will be formed as a
perpendicular to the mid-sagittal plane passing through the
occipital condyle/Cl interspace and the hip joint centers mid-
point. The XY-plane will be constructed as a normal to the XZ- and
YZ-planes passing through suprasternale. Thus, the point of origin
will be close to the C7/T1 interspace of the intersection of the
three orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along
the intersection passing through the hip knee joint centers of
rotation. The XY- plane will be constructed as a normal to the XZ-
and YZ-planes passing through the anterior surface point. Thus,
the point of origin will be at the intersection of the three
orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along the
intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes; the +Y-axis will pass
laterally along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes; +Z-axis
will pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ- and YZ-
planes.
Thorax
Links: Thoraco- sternum - A closed linkage system composed of
three links. The right and left transthorax are straight
line distances from the C7/T1 interspace to the right and
left sternoclavicular joint centers of rotation. The
transternum link is a straight line distance between the
right and left sternoclavicular joint centers of rotation.
Clavicular - The straight line between the sternoclavicu-
lar and the claviscapular joint centers.
Scapular - The straight line between the claviscapular
and glenohumeral joint centers.
Thoracic - The straight line between C7/T1 and T12/L1 ver-
tebral body interspace joint centers.
IV- 62
Axis System: Formed relative to the mid- sagittal (XZ) plane de-
fined by suprasternale and center of the vertebral body inter-
spaces of C7/T1 and T12/L1. The YZ-plane will be formed as a
perpendicular to the mid-sagittal plane passing through the C7/T1
interspace. The XY-plane will be constructed as a normal to the
XZ- and YZ-planes passing through the C7/T1 interspace. Thus, the
point of origin will be at the C7/T1 interspace. The +X-axis will
pass anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes;
the +Y-axis will pass laterally along the intersection of the XY-
and YZ-planes; and the +Z-axis will pass superiorly along the
intersection of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
Lumbar
Link: The straight line between the T12/L1 and L5/S1 vertebrae
interspace joint centers.
Axis System: Formed relative to the mid-sagittal plane (XZ) de-
fined by the T12/L1 and L5/S1 joint centers and umbilicus. The
YZ-plane will be formed perpendicular to the XZ-plane passing
through the T12/L1 and L5/S1 joint centers. The XY-plane will be
formed as a normal to the XZ- and YZ-planes passing through L5/S1.
Thus, the point of origin will be at the intersection of the three
orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along the
intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes; the +Y-axis will pass
laterally along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes; and the
+Z-axis will pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ-
and YZ-planes.
Pelvis
Links: The pelvis is treated as a closed-loop linkage system com-
posed of three links. The right and left iliopelvic links are
straight lines between the L5/S1 interspace joint center and a
hip joint center. The transpelvic link is a straight line between
the right and left hip joint centers.
Axis System: A frontal plane (YZ) will be established using sym-
physion and the right and left anterior superior iliac spines.
The XY-plane will be constructed as a perpendicular to the YZ
plane passing through the right and left anterior superior iliac
spines. The XZ-plane will be constructed as a normal to the XY
and YZ-planes passing through symphysion. The p>oint of origin will
lie on a line passing through the right and left anterior superior
iliac spines approximately at the midpoint of the bispinous dia-
meter. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along the intersection
of the XY- and YZ-planes. The +Y-axis will pass laterally along
the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes and the +Z axis will
pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
IV-63
Upper Arm
Link: Th- straight line between the glenohumeral and elbow joint
centers of rotation.
Axis System: A para-sagittal plane (XZ) will be constructed with
the arm in the extended anatomical position using the glenohumeral
and elbow joint centers of rotation and a point on the anterior
surface of the skin overlying the maximum protrusion of the biceps
brachii muscle approximately at the middle of the upper arm. The
YZ-plane will be established perpendicular to the XZ-plane pass-
ing through the glenohumeral and elbow joint centers of rotation.
The XY-plane will be constructed as a normal to the XZ- and YZ-
planes passing through the anterior surface point. Thus, the ori-
gin of the axis system will be at the intersection of the three
orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass anteriorly along the in-
tersection of the XY- and XZ-planes; the +Y-axis will pass later-
ally along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-planes; and the +Z-
axis will pass superiorly along the intersection of the XZ- and
YZ-planes.
Forearm
Link: The straight line between the elbow and wrist joint centers
of rotation.
Axis System: A para-sagittal plane (XZ) will be established with
the arm in the extended anatomical position using the elbow and
wrist joint centers of rotation and a point on the anterior
surface of the skin mid-way along the length of the forearm. The
YZ-plane will be established as a perpendicular to the XZ-plane
passing through the elbow and wrist joint centers. The XY-plane
will be constructed as a normal to the XZ- and YZ-planes passing
through the anterior surface point. Thus, the origin will be at
the intersection of the three orthogonal planes. The 4-X-axis will
pass anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes;
the +Y-axis will pass laterally along the intersection of the XY-
and YZ-planes; and the +Z axis will pass superiorly along the
intersection of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
Hand
Link: The straight line between the wrist joint center of rota-
tion and the center of mass of the hand.
Axis System: Formed relative to a para-sagittal plane (XZ) with
the arm and hand in the extended anatomical position using the
wrist joint center of rotation, the most dorsal point on metacar-
pal III and the most distal point at the tip of phalanx III. The
YZ-plane will be established as a perpendicular to the XZ-plane
and will pass through the wrist joint center and the phalanx III
distal point. The XY-plane will be formed as a normal to the XZ-
and YZ-planes passing through the metacarpale III landmark. Thus,
the point of origin of the axis system will lie at the intersec-
tion of the three orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass
IV-64
anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes; the +Y-
axis will pass laterally along the intersection of the XY- and YZ-
planes; and the +Z-axis will pass superiorly along the intersec-
tion of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
Thigh
Link: The straight line between the hip and knee joint center of
rotation.
Axis System: Formed relative to a para-sagittal plane (XZ) with
the leg in the extended anatomical position using the hip and knee
joint centers of rotation and a point on the anterior surface of
the thigh lying approximately at mid-segment. The YZ-plane will
be established as a perpendicular to the XZ-plane passing through
the knee and hip joint centers of rotation. The XY-plane will be
established as a normal to the YZ- and XZ-planes passing through
the anterior surface point. Thus, the origin of the axis system
will be at the intersection of the three orthogonal planes. The
+X-axis will pass anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and
XZ-planes; the +Y axis will pass laterally along the intersection
of the XZ- and YZ-planes; and the +Z-axis will pass superiorly a-
long the intersection of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
Shank
Link: The straight line between the knee and ankle joint centers
of rotation.
Axis System: Formed relative to a para-sagittal plane (XZ) with
the leg in the extended anatomical position using the knee and
ankle joint centers and a point on the anterior surface approxi-
mately at mid-segment. The YZ-plane will be constructed as a
perpendicular to the XZ-plane passing through the knee and ankle
joint centers of rotation. The XY-plane will be formed as a normal
to the XZ- and YZ-planes passing through the anterior surface
landmark. Thus, the point of origin of the axis system will lie at
the intersection of the three orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will
pass anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and XZ-planes;
the +Y-axis will pass along the intersection of the XY- and
YZ-planes; and the +Z-axis will pass superiorly along the inter-
section of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
Foot
Link: The straight line between the ankle joint center of
rotation and the center of mass of the foot.
Axis System: Formed relative to a para-sagittal plane (XZ) with
leg in the extended anatomical position using the ankle joint cen-
ter, the most posterior point on the heel, and most anterior point
on the tip of the second toe. The YZ-plane is constructed
perpendicular to the XZ-plane passing through the most posterior
IV- 65
and anterior points of the foot. The XY-plane is formed as a
normal to the XZ- and YZ-planes passing through the ankle joint
center. Thus, the point of origin of the axis system lies at the
intersection of the three orthogonal planes. The +X-axis will pass
anteriorly along the intersection of the XY- and XZ-axis; and the
+Y-axis will pass laterally along the intersection of the XY- and
YZ-planes; and the +Z-axis will pass superiorly along the inter-
section of the XZ- and YZ-planes.
IV- 66
APPENDIX B
REGRESSION EQUATIONS
IV- 6 7
APPENDIX B
REGRESSION EQUATIONS
Tables 2, 3 and 4, regression equations for estimating center of mass,
weight and volume of body segments, present a series of two- and three-step
equations for predicting individual segment centers of mass, weight and vol-
ume from anthropometry. The regression equations are relatively simple to
use but are given here in a form which differs somewhat to the customary form
The first entry in Table 2 is for predicting the location of the center
of mass of the head and trunk as a distance from the top of the head
(vertex). The equation is to be read as:
CM of Head and trunk from vertex = .859 Bicristal breadth + 23.539 (+1.20)
The two and three- step equations are correspondingly to be read as:
CM of Head and trunk from vertex = .491 Bicristal breadth +
.408 Head-trunk length + 1.313 (+1.01)
CM of Head and trunk from vertex = .621 Bicristal breadth +
.582 Head-trunk length - .181 Stature + 14.050 (+0.75)
As the number of anthropometric variables in the equation increases, the
correlation coefficient increases and the standard error of estimate decreas-
es.
For the Head and trunk, the CM is located only as a distance from
vertex (Z axis); for the majority of the other segments, the CM is located
both in the Z axis and at a distance from the anterior surface of the segment
(X axis). The location of the CM in the Y axis was assumed in this study to
lie in the medial-lateral center of the segment.
IV- 68
C *J
o e
•H «
« u
0) >M
h «
55
O
U
U V
U U
at 4J
•O CO
C td
cd
4J U-l
CO o
u
<»
•-H
1 -»
«»
>o
1 ^
fn
t^
Ov
00
1 o>
o»
r^
1 ox
p»
o>
<n r-> r~ r^ 1^
r* CO O* O^ 00
00
CM
ox
ox
00 <t ^
S
ox
00
CM
CO
IT)
ox
St
00 u-i
\o 1-1 m m o
c
o
4J
(d
3
O*
j:
/— ^
j:
/-N
4J
^
u
x^*
U3
00
4J
00
J3
4J
/^
c
^
00
c
JJ
00
^
£
/-\
y'-s
0)
£
c
0)
/-\
00
c
j:
4J
X
J-
l-J
4J
^>
0)
.J
J3
c
0)
y-v
u
00
cU
4J
00
j:
■.J
4J
0)
,J
£
00
e
00
00
Cd
c
4J
Cd
00
hJ
4J
c
4)
c
c
1-1
4)
00
A
1-4
c
JS
in
00
0)
■J
«
0)
ua
•J
c
1-1
3
w
in
4J
3
c
>J
ij
hJ
iH
01
3
^
,J
3
00
•r4
0)
^
Cd
H
Cd
■J
.O
1-1
•rl
c
■o
^
(d
4J
P
cd
Cd
^
i-(
i-(
[b
0)
•o
0)
(0
c
00
t-i
T-I
1-t
4J
X
3
Cd
[b
3
<d
ij
Oii
(d
t-l
c
P
ja
Xi
00
J3
1-1
X
•H
Otf
c
ra
0)
•H
•H
c
CM
1-t
3
X
•o
(fl
X
r-l
ij
X
H
H
w
r~
(b
.O
CJx
«
><
3
a
X
■J
1-1
1-1
-*
CJx
otf
•H
xO
(d
m
X
X
00
X
[b
s
xO
n
T)
-*
X
00
c
xO
Cd
•
OO
X
00
ct
xO
00
f-t
xO
r~
CM
•H
o
ox
X
o
•
xO
(A
ox
CM
xO
=)
00
xO
in
XI
s^
CM
•
o
o
Ox
•
o
c^
•
•
CM
1-1
xO
o
«— 1
^ta^
«-4
00
•
o
»<
o
s
•
o
X
o
CJx
E-i
-t-
•
1-^
<->
N— '
-h
ox
s^
ox
•
s^
o
o
o
X
ro
o
o
+
•
o
+
o
r>
+
^^
Sm^
IT)
>M^
•
r^
o
+
r»
^
+
00
xO
CM
1-1
•J
Ox
«M^
O
CM
CJx
1-1
+
+
I~
oo
-(-
s^
00
r->
ox
•
m
4-
xO
•
CM
P~
•
1—1
O
+
(M
w4
r*
m
o
xO
(Jx
n
o
CM
in
-1-
PsI
•
00
o
00
oo
CM
r«-
ir»
•
m
•-H
•
CXJ
C4
•^
II
•
CM
o
II
oo
vo
1-1
1-4
00
xO
00
CJx
CM
•
00
r»
•
xO
xO
m
OO
xO
II
II
Ov
<»
Ji
lO
ox
<t
j:
xO
•
•
II
II
•
CM
r*
xO
4J
•
r-.
4J
lO
I-H
1—1
xO
•
00
II
r-
00
II
CM
CO
M
X
o
•
M
Ji
CO
II
c
II
c
1-1
4J
4J
1-1
00
4J
4J
CM
V
A
II
0)
J3
II
00
00
II
00
00
c
0)
Si
,J
U
Ji
^
U
II
c
c
II
c
II
00
^
00
C
^
Ji
00
c
^
0)
Ji
j:
0)
-J
u
00
e
•J
00
c
0)
c
■J
c
1-1
0)
c
00
c
•g
•s
4J
00
c
00
c
•^
•g
5
g
in
3
m
3
Id
.J
■J
•J
Cd
•-I
lH
1-1
1
01
0)
cd
1^
■J
1
_)
1
1-1
(d
c
^4
0)
ki
fe
•o
Cd
4)
i
0)
o
i
i
s
X
00
1-1
JS
i
1^
1-1
9
X
•<
od
X
£
<
fa
(h
CO
H
(b
H
(O
IV- 69
TABLE 2
REGRESSION EQUATIONS TO ESTIMATE CENTER OF MASS OF BODY SEOffiNTS
FROM CLAUSER, ET AL. (1969)
Seament
Head & trunk
Measured from
Independent Resresslon Vi
irlables
Constant
+ 23.539
+ 1.313
+ 14.050
.897
.935
.968
Top of head
Blcrlstal
breadth 2
.859
.491
.621
Head- torso
length
+ .402
+ .582
Stature
- .181
1.20
1.01
.75
Total leg
Trochanterion
Ttblale
height
.518
.534
.562
Calf circum-
ference
+ .099
+ .404
Upper thigh
circumference
- .264
+
+
+
11.016
7.235
9.061
.638
.U50
.721
1.52
1.57
1.50
Total leg
Anterior aspect
AP at cm'
.530
.795
.935
Weight
- .053
- .054
Iliac crest
skinfold
- .050
+
+
+
1.212
1.499
0.408
.695
.817
.894
.62
.52
.43
Total ant
Acromion
B huserus- ^
rad. length
.966
.947
.963
Forearm
circumference
+ .391
+ .918
Arm circum-
ference
(axillary)
- .571
+
2.336
7.353
4.909
.684
.729
.J42
1.67
1.64
1.35
Head
Top of head
Head
clrcunfcrcnce
.293
.246
Height of
head
+ .159
-
5.573
6.711
.704
.731
.55
.55
Head
Back of head
Head
drcunference
.158
.238
Head
breadth
- .570
+
1.039
3.376
.468
.541
.55
.55
Trunk
Suprastemale
Bl-splnous
breadth
.578
.622
.471
Iliac crest
skinfold
• .066
- .058
Trunk
length
+ .166
+
+
+
8.102
7.741
1.683
.846
.900
.926
.79
.68
.61
Thigh
Tro chanterion
Trochanterion
height
.250
.214
.227
Knee breadth
(bone)
+ .902
+ .989
Iliac crest
- .033
-
5.902
11.660
13.362
.841
.918
.934
.68
.52
.49
Thigh
Anterior aspect
AF at CM
.595
-
.956
.838
.69
Shank A foot
Tlblale
Tlblale
height
.360
.335
AF at CM*
Calf clrcm-
ference
- .159
Calf length
+
+
5.226
11.267
.789
.871
.68
.57
Shank & toot
Anterior aspect
.539
.646
+ .114
-
1.731
7^44
.782
.850
.40
.35
All dimensions are given in centimeters except skinfolds which are given in millimeters.
Vor a precise daflnltlon of all dimensions, see Clauser, et al. (1969).
Anterior -posterior
Ball of hiaaarus-radlale length.
IV- 70
TABLE 2 - Concluded
Segment
Shank
Shank
Foot
Foot
CM
Measured from
Tlblale
Anterior aspect
Heel
Sole
Independent
Regression Var
tables
Constant
R
Tlblale
Knee breadth
height
(bone)
• 276
+
1.709
.800
.309
- .558
+
5.786
.872
AP at CM
Calf length
.455
.
0.301
.665
.503
+ .101
-
4.688
.725
Foot
Ankle
Lateral mal-
length
circumference
leolus height
.217
+
5.729
.566
.233
+ .135
+
2.627
.712
.153
+ .137
+ .uuu
+
1.403
.827
Arch
circumference
.325
.
4.639
.672
Se
.50
.43
.53
.51
.33
.29
.25
0.47
Upper arm
Acromion
B humerus- 3 Arm Elbow Breadth
rad. length Circumference (bone)
(axillary)
.707
.710 - .045
.329 - .250 + 2.827
-
4.563
.689
1.21
-
3.333
.691
1.26
-
6.168
.918
.72
Upper arm
Anterior aspect
Forearm & hand Radlale
AP at CM
.444
Wrist breadth Radialc- st y 1 ion Forearm
(bone) length Circumference
.665
2.765
1.962
1.617
+ .379
+ .585
.331
.23
+
.405
.764
.72
-
4.822
.847
.62
+
.510
.929
.46
Forearm & hand Anterior aspect
AP at CM
.890
.900
.890
Elbow breadth Styl.-mcta
(bone) 111 length
- .280
- .313
.229
2.355
.913
.25
.385
.936
.23
2.153
.974
.16
Forearm
Radlale
Radlale-stylion Wrist breadth
length
.537
.440
(bone)
+ .761
3.808
5.645
.788
.821
.53
.51
Forearm
Anterior aspect
AP at CM
.790
2.295
.843
.35
Hand
Metacarpale III
Wrist breadth
(bone)
.358
.657
Hand
circumference
- .202
.415
+ 2.130
.272
.486
.39
.37
Hand
Medial aspect
Wrist breadth
(bone)
1.224
1.038
Hand
breadth
+ .248
- 2.226
- 3.271
.769
.810
.32
.30
Styllon-Metacarpale III length.
lV-71
TMU 3
ncussioM iquATioNS ton ESTauTiMB staatn vEicns
ntOM CLMISn, HCCOMVILU AND YOUMC (1969)*
■m4 » tn^
TBUI I*t
Total •!■
lnaM>«lld»nt l..r...t0ll V«rt«bUi
•e4y Wtlght Trunk ImtCh** Ch«<t depth
.MO
.321
.Ml
*o4]r Halfht
.161
.lU
.09*
lady W«l(ht
.0*7
.031
.01*
,362
.30*
Q»lt drcu
C«r«nc«
•f .221
+ .1*6
+ .310
Upper thlgfa
circiai*r«nc«
+ .113
Hrt«t ciroafcrmc* Btc«p>
ci.Tamt»ttnc*
.166
.162
* .063
Conatant
••■ .009
- 17.077
• 11.122
.000
3.792
S.*}S
+ .132
• 1.89*
• 3.0*1
.966
.980
.967
1.36
1.11
.93
919
.93*
96*
.62
.30
.*6
883
929
9J2
.23
.19
.16
clraafaraaca llat(ht
■aad
Tnmk
Thlcb
Shank k foot
Uppar ara
Foraaia 4 hand
.1*6
- 3.716
.10*
■f .013
- 2.189
Tniak
Ckaat
Body Walght
lancth
draaafaranca
.511
- 2.837
.69*
+ .3*7
- 19.186
.3*9
+ .*23
+ .229
- 35.460
Uppar thl«h
Iliac creat
■adr H«t(bt
drcunferance
akinfold
.120
- 1.123
.07*
+ .138
- 4.641
.07*
-f .123
+ .027
- 4.216
Calf
Tiblala
Ankle
droatfaranea
height
drciaference
.165
- 1.279
.172
+ .051
• 3.824
.130
+ .056
+ .103
- 4.915
Calf
Tibial e
Ankle
ciraakfaranca
height
droaafarence
.135
- 1.318
.1*1
-«■ .0*2
- 3.421
.111
+ .0*7
+ .074
- 4.208
todr Halaht Ankla clroafaranca foot langtb
.009
+ .369
,005
+ .033
- .030
.003
■*■ .0*8
+ .027
.869
■ody Weight ^
m droflifer-
Acromion-
mca (axillary)
red. length
.030
.238
.019
-t- .060
- 1.280
.007
+ .092
+ .030
- 3.101
Hriat
Poreaiw
tadlale-atyllon
clroaference
drcuaference
length
.168
- 1.295
.132
+ .0*9
- 1.987
.103
+ .0*6
+ .043
- 2.543
Wrlat
ro rearm
clrciaUerence
drctMference
.119
.913
.081
+ .052
• 1.650
Hrlat
Vriet breedth
Hand
clraaafaranca
(bone)
breadth
.051
.418
.036
-f i)80
.660
.029
* .073
+ .031
.746
81*
875
.20
.17
.966
.979
.986
1.33
1.11
.92
.893
.933
.9*4
.54
.45
.43
.934
.971
.982
.16
.11
.09
.933
.971
.979
.14
.09
.08
.810
.862
.907
.06
.05
.04
.879
.931
.961
.14
.12
.09
.874
.919
.940
.10
.09
.08
.827
.920
.09
.06
.863
.917
.9*2
.03
.03
.02
•Weight t« given in ktlograae. akinfolda in Billlnatars ana all other dimeniions in centlMtera.
*^roT a pradae definition of all diisnalona, aee Claueer, at al. (1969).
IV- 72
TABU 1.
MECUSSION EQUATIONS TO ESTIMATT SECKEMT VOLUME
F«OM CLAUSEIl,ET AL. (1969)»
H«ad t tnnk
Total lag
Total ana
langth
Thigh
Shank & foot
Upper ani
Foraana & hand
Body Walght clrcuafarance**
.563
.358 + .353
.228 + .450
Uppar thigh
Body Wtlght clrcunfaranca
.157
.105 + .157
Conatant »
Wrlat
Bleep*
Body Walght
circumference
circumference
.007
.032
+ .165
.015
+ .161
+ .080
Head
Weight
circumference
.173
.139
+ .012
Body Weight
Waist
Chest
breadth
circumference
.53*
.389
+ .476
.179
+ .502
+ .347
Body Weight
Upper thigh
lilac crest
clrcuafcrence
skinfold
.116
.073
+ .128
.073
+ .106
+ .039
Shank
Tlblale
Ankle
clrciBfercnce height
circumference
.148
.155
+ .050
.103
+ .059
+ .127
Shank
Tlblale
Ankle
circumference height
clrcuaference
.123
.130
+ .044
.090
+ .051
+ .097
Body Weight
Ankle
Foot
circumference
length
.008
.005
+ .029
.003
+ .043
+ .025
Body Weight
Arm clrctaaference Acromlon-ra
(axillary)
length
.030
.018
+ .070
.008
+ .098
+ .044
Vrl*t Forearm
clrcuif«r«ncc clrcmference
.153
Radlalc-ityllon
length
.117
■t- .048
.093
+ .045
+ .035
Wrlat
Forearm
circwfcrancc
clrctvfercnce
.111
.072
♦ .053
Hrlet
Wrist breadth
Hand
clrctMfarence
(bone)
breadth
.048
.036
+ .071
.028
* .066
+ .027
.187
19.331
45.797
.345
4.370
.106
1.850
2.913
5.453
4.301
- 2.343
- 7.392
- 26.817
1.149
4.390
3.760
1.056
3.555
4.910
1.170
3.396
4.427
.360
.025
.794
.330
1.600
3.234
1.181
1.847
2.278
.875
1.622
.410
.617
.686
.951
.970
.988
.924
.955
.907
.945
.968
.883
.912
.949
.968
.988
.888
.924
.950
.911
.955
.975
.908
.956
.973
.810
.875
.901
.886
.953
.976
.890
.943
.960
.842
.954
.885
.935
.958
1.65
1.35
.90
.58
.47
.20
.16
.13
.17
.16
1.59
1.33
.86
.54
.47
.40
.17
.13
.10
.15
.11
.09
.05
.04
.04
.14
.10
.07
.09
.07
.06
.08
.05
.03
.02
.02
•Weight is given In kllograBS, skinfolds In mllUmaters and all other dimensions In
**ror a precise definition of all dlmenalons, see Clauser, et si. (1969).
centimeters.
IV-73
2 __
uoisstoN tauAnom rai mioicnMO nviciru. wmm or aaru (a-a, ) mw ouudlu it *l.
(197J)
H««d
I -
»„-
I -
JOi
I
l'
I ■
I '
n
I '
JT
Torxo
I •
t -
•n
I "
I
rr
I -
2.129 lo4y lift.
1.676 lo^ Uft.
3.U« htdr V|C.
tl.313 Sa|. Wt'-
JO.tW Sa|. «(t.
10*. 133 Sa|. Vtt.
71.2)« S«t. V«l.
67. M7 S«|. Vol.
133.03) >•■• Vol.
2M.900 tott V|C.
2*4.6*3 >o«y W|t.
102.307 lo^ir Vic.
339.613 So*. Ii|t.
SM.39] Sot. «sc.
m.323 Sof ■•'.
621.112 So(. Vol.
601.600 Sot. vol.
203.203 Sot. Vol.
(Iltkc m4 U(t)
I^ - 1.313 tc*, HtC.
I_ - 1.006 lo«T DtC.
.6*6 loly «|C.
76.730 Sot. Of.
31. 363 So|. Vtt.
26.023 Sof Vtt.
76.063 So|. Vol.
69.636 Sot- vol.
26.t6* lot. Vol.
rr
i„ -
I .
rr
1 .
■a
»=-
I _
TT
I_ -
+ 320J0
+ 56«ia
* 6(66
• 73623
. 36367
■ 236637
■ 9«07(
- 9U12
- 302(60
- 3136036
- 7666t7«
- 2(93326
- 2(23363
- 7632*70
• 2637636
- (636003
-12««62a(
• 636*563
36(3*
6*616
«0«6
377
3*363
26122
72
3)217
66
325*(
75
63033
75
2(310
70
27066
96
20K0
72
3)613
77
27263
93
2667*
96
137*)65
96
16**612
*(
J3)*37
91
1063*61
96
1606313
*(
33)*5(
**
7)3665
*7
110051(
*6
64(75*
.63
.tl7
.*1
.76
ForooM (llt^t am4 Lole)
I -
TT
I -
■I
'--
I -
TT
1 -
I -
TT
I -
1.0(6 lo(7 Ht<
1.062 ia(y Uft
.271 lo^r Vtt
6).)00 Sot. Vtt
•0.1*0 S0|,
15.760 Sot
63.515 lot<
•0.(66 Sot
U.OM So|
V|t.
*(t.
Vol.
Vol.
vol.
»T«5
UI2
5466
*020
)(((
2621
(6«)
565
172
«0«1
.(7
.*6
.(7
.(7
.««
.16
.(7
21*(2
16355
313*
l(*07
1*16*
1*66
1(635
l(0)«
**7)
(652
10*0
*11*
(«67
•*1
*6(6
•750
57)
(IlthC and Loft)
.106 lo4r V|t.
+
2*4
yy
.117 lodT V(t.
-
17*0
.056 iedy V|t.
-
1703
21.1*2 So(. Vtt.
-
977
21.695 So(. V(t.
-
2653
ss
11.616 Sat. V|t.
-
246]
m
22.5*0 Sof vol.
-
UO
yy
2).0*1 Sof Vol.
-
2417
U
12.216 Sot. Vol.
-
240(
(BlSbt
aa4 Loft)
I -
22.20* (odT Vtt.
-
W2«7(
22.610 to*r Vtt.
-
270*))
a>
7.])] toif V|C.
-
25*21*
m
176.770 Sot. "(t.
-
17732
17(.*1) Sot. Vtt.
-
70
M.no Sot. Vtt.
-
i*ts6a
177.*5( So(. vol.
-
14*73
Tf
1(1.(0* (Of «>1.
+
1(09
•> "
5*.)U Sof Vol.
-
16(7*7
(Kt^iC a^ Ufc)
l^j ■
5.*34 lo^T Vtt.
♦
*)5»
5.)65 lodT »tt.
+
4««S1
.«55 tntj Vtt.
-
)))*)
IM.207 Sot. V|t.
♦
)«2*4
yy
115.*2* Sof «(t.
♦
53((*
u "
22.252 So|. Vtt.
-
»775
m "■
165.6*7 So(. Vol.
+
27S35
lM.5ai (•«. vol.
♦
475**
9* *
U.6*5 (.«. Vol.
-
5027)
■l^t m4 Laft)
l^ -
.6)2 to«r V(t.
+
44*1
yy "
.55* tot. Vat.
+
7)2*
.161 tody V(t.
-
1*15
«0.(l* So*. Vtt.
-
1(155
67.771 (Of V|t.
-
tio*
■s
U.«90 t*(. Vtt.
-
*051
»«-
6«.«>6 So«. Vol.
-
7*47
»„-
37.130 (Of «>1.
+
71*
77
1279
•t
120*
72
793
.92
7*5
*4
«*«
(7
5*)
*2
79*
»5
6)2
(7
55(
93
131660
•«
176759
(6
63057
9*
10X26
92
145457
90
54426
9)
104271
91
1437*3
*0
545(7
.()
5(521
(4
49*51
(*
ao7a
(0
(2315
•5
47*40
(7
7*30
(2
59030
.(7
43097
.(*
(0*2
15.055 (o|. Vol. - 4(*4
.*5
.72
.(0
.*6
.«7
.*!
.25
.74
.«5
7J19
50(1
1542
1202
1*«)
«*0
*!((
4*10
115*
Reproduced from
best available copy.
IV- 74
APPENDIX C
CONVERSION TABLE OF MOMENTS OF INERTIA
IV- 75
oooo 2 — 222
S 8
S ^
o 2 " 2 S S S
— O f*t *« w o
S S s s s ~
o o o 2 2
(^ « o M M M e
5 2 R 2 w « 2
♦ X • o o o »^
t^ ^*. ^^ t^
o o o
oooo
o Q S
s s 5 5 5 5
I ^ S A *^ "^ "^
O »^ I -^
Q
z
<
►J
pa
<
H
w
ft,
o
CO
E-«
z
s
o
H
z
o
z
o
a
o o o o o
oooo
i s 5 = 2 2 2 2 i M M
"J 'o "o 'o 'o 'o "o "g ~o "o "o 2
5528222 ;«SSSS
^K «n in
o "o "o '222222
S-R--" '52ss5s
"o "o 'o "2 "s *2 2 "2 2
•;^S„ ! SnKSSS
• ■•O 0***^AA
In
~j 2 2 2
2 s :: s :
01 » M •
"^ e o o o o
r> ,- P» « » S
« fn W> 3 B •
2 2 *: J ^ » » »
li 5 i 3 s S s =
o o **o o o o o 2
*" •• i
o o o o
o 00000
'^ J ^ w ^ w s. -
^5 : :3 ;: ;: r ?
^1 91 , 1^ f^ «^ ♦^ ■•
0000000
oooo
•^U '*u '^** »* M "w
• • • u o 2
* * ? S 5 ?
IV- 7 6
I i
CHAPTER V
ARM-LEG REACH AND WORKSPACE LAYOUT
by
Howard W. Stoudt
Michigan State University
This chapter presents information on functional reach measurements
relevant to the design and layout of workspaces in the Space Shuttle and
Spacelab programs. Most of the existing data described in the following
review have been taken under standard gravity Conditions on the earth's
surface, with specific workspace constraints, i.e., subject usually in a
seated position, with fixed backrest and seat surface angles, and lap and
upper torso restraint systems that may severely limit the amount of body
movement. The measurements were also made on populations anthropometrically
selected to be representative of the appropriate user group. In short, the
intent was always to gain reach data that would be applicable under a given
set of design conditions for one group of people with specifically defined
reaches. As a result, functional reach data that are immediately and direct-
ly applicable to space vehicles in a zero-g environment, for all practical
purposes, do not presently exist.
t
t
In the present NASA project we are concerned with potentially very
different sorts of workspace conditions, i.e., standing, or "free-floating"
in the neutral body position in a state of weightlessness, where there may
normally be no restraints on body position or movement. In order to stabi-
lize body position in a zero-g environment, some form of mechanical restraint
such as handholds, waist belts, or fixed shoes, must be utilized. Even with
restraints, however, there will probably be considerably more body movement
possible than that encountered in any one-g reach study to date and greater
freedom of body movement implies greater reach distances. If
In addition, the potential Space Shuttle-Spacelab population differs
anthropometrically from those groups on which functional reach data are cur-
rently available. We are no longer dealing with a precisely defined "U.S.
Air Force" population, or even with "U.S. drivers," but rather with a poten-
tially worldwide population that varies markedly in body size and reach, from
perhaps 5th percentile Oriental females to 95th percentile U.S. or Northwes-
tern European males. In addition, since the space vehicles presently envi-
sioned may be operational through the period 1980-1990, and since secular \
changes in body size are known to be taking place in many populations, it
will be necessary to take into account possible increases in functional
reaches during that time period.
In this chapter each of the above variables will be discussed as
necessary, and the most appropriate basic reach data will be presented along
with recommendations for applying correction factors to adjust for differen-
ces in (1) workspace, task, and body position; (2) environmental conditions- ._
primarily g forces; and (3) anthropometric characteristics of various L
populations .
V-1
UllllJLlllllLlllJLlllli
One of the earliest attempts to deal systematically with the measure-
ment of functional arm reach was that of King, Morrow and Vollmer (1947) who
measured 139 naval personnel to determine the boundaries of the maximum area
for the operation of manual controls. In this study the subjects were seated
in a standard pilot's seat with a locked lap belt and shoulder harness and
kept their backs against the backrest cushion. A later publication extrapo-
lated the values of these reaches that would be possible with 18 inches of
forward shoulder movement permitted (King, 1948). A similar approach was
utilized by Emanuel and Dempsey (1955) in an Air Force study of the effects
V-2
V
k i
Review of Existing Data on Functional Reach Measurements
Static Reach Measurements
Traditional measurements of anatomic arm length, such as shoulder-
elbow or elbow-fingertip lengths, or of anatomic leg length such as buttock-
knee length, have long been included in the battery of dimensions taken in
many anthropometric surveys. Such "static" measurements, however, have gen-
erally been of relatively little use to those concerned with how far a person
can reach and perform some specified task.
In attempting to deal with this problem, some anthropometric surveys
have included limited kinds of arm reach measurements, usually two or three ^
dimensions on the outstretched arm. Hertzberg et al. (1954), for example,
includes such measurements as "arm reach from wall," a wall-to-fingertip di-
mension taken with both shoulders against a vertical surface and the arm
extended horizontally. Similar reach measurements have also been included in
more recent anthropometric surveys (Clauser et al. 1972; White and Churchill,
1971) but ultimately they are of limited utility in equipment or workspace
design since they describe a specific reach to a single point immediately in
front of, or directly above, the subject. These dimensions tell us nothing
of what other reaches might be to almost innumerable other points surrounding 'i!'
the subject, though crude extrapolations can be made in some cases. Nor can
static reach measurements accurately describe the effects of body movement.
For this purpose, different kinds of reach measurements, specifically "func-
tional" reach measurements, are required.
Functional Reach Measurements
All measurements of functional reach are more difficult to obtain and J
to present in a meaningful way than are static measurements. The more impor-
tant factors contributing to this problem are: a) variations in body posi-
tion including, if seated, seat height above the floor and angulation of seat
surface and of backrest; b) the presence or absence of restraint systems for
the body; c) anatomical locations of such restraint systems; d) the kind of
reach to be made, or the task to be performed; and e) finally and most
importantly in the present case, the presence or absence of g forces.
I
Y
UllSMUliMMMMIiilllllli
li
on arm reach of a partial pressure flying suit. Ely, Thomson and Orlansky
(1963) developed graphic presentations of functional arm reach which have
some utility as very rough guides or indicators of reach, but are lacking
specificity and are difficult to apply, especially since the means of
determining the data were not specified, nor were the physical characteris- .;
tics of the population on which they were measured. a,
Dempster and his associates (Dempster, 1955; Dempster, Gabel and
Felts, 1959) have presented an excellent theoretical and methodological
approach to the problem of functional reaches and "kineto spheres", but they
were not primarily concerned with obtaining reach data on specific popula-
tions for specific applications. The data again are of limited practical
utility. A somewhat different device and technique for obtaining arm reaches
was described by Wright (1964), but also without applicable data. p
These earlier data have been largely superseded by the work of Kennedy
(1964), who determined the outer boundaries of grasping-reach envelopes
for a shirt- sleeved operator by making measurements at a total of 24 vertical
planes intersecting with 12 horizontal planes, resulting in 288 measurements
for each of 20 subjects.
Stoudt et al . (1970) obtained functional arm reach measurements
on 100 subjects, 50 males and 50 females, selected to approximate the general 1/
U.S. adult driving population in height and weight. The purpose was to pro-
vide data to assist in establishing the outer limits for the location of
controls in motor vehicles. One hundred and twenty arm reach points were
defined for each subject.
Other studies on functional arm reaches relative to U.S. automotive
design, have been conducted for the industry by Woodson et al . (1971),
and within the industry by, among others, Chaffee and associates (1968),
and by Hammond and Roe (1972) for the Society of Automotive Engineers. In V
the European automotive industry, arm reach studies have been conducted
by, for example, Rebiffe et al. (1969).
The discussion so far has related only to arm reaches. Leg reaches
may also be important in workspace layout and design, though perhaps some-
what less so in a space environment. Data on functional leg reaches are
unfortunately even more imperfectly known than are arm reach data. Thorough
rigorous studies comparable to those made on arm reaches are non-existent.
Leg reach has been investigated primarily from the point of view of range ^
of motion at the joints of the leg, and of leg strength exertable
at different leg positions and angles, rather than from a concern about
spatial limits for operation of foot controls. The single exception is some
new, limited, information, as yet unpublished, by Laubach and Alexander
(n.d.). Perhaps the single best effort relative to layout of foot controls is
that of Ely et al. (1963). However, the lack of specificity of the
anthropometric data upon which it was based, and the rather tentative nature
of the somewhat overly generalized recommendations, make the study difficult
to use except rs a very rough guideline.
V-3
I'
lIllSMUlillHiiilMilllll
ii
The major difficulty with all functional reach studies described
above, is that they have been conducted under very specific workspace condi-
tions, usually seated with a given restraint system, always in a one-g envi-
ronment, and on specially defined populations in terms of physical and
anthropometric characteristics. In attempting to utilize these data under
other conditions such as weightlessness, or for other populations, serious '
problems of extrapolation arise.
With regard to functional reach studies designed to determine capabil-
ities in a space environment, both the General Electric Space Division
(1969), and the Martin Marietta Corporation (Lenda, Rosener, and Stephenson,
1972) have carried out experiments under water, with neutral buoyancy condi-
tions simulating a state of weightlessness. These data have been summarized
in Man/System Design Criteria for Manned Orbiting Payload, Section S.Anthro- _
pometry/Crew Capability (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, |
wprr.
These studies are quite useful in that they indicate for the first
time, in a definitive way, how functional reaches differ in a neutral buoy-
ancy environment simulating zero-g conditions. Unfortunately, because of the
small numbers of subjects involved and their lack of representativeness of
the anthropometric range of the future spacelab populations, the data are of
very limited direct applicability in determining functional reach areas and ^
workspace layouts. As the NASA report states, these data "...should be used L
only as guideline information. The design of a crew station shall assure
that all tasks required at the station are located so that all of the user
population can perform the task. This means that all tasks must be located
well within the reach envelopes shown... so that the tasks can be performed by
a 5th percentile woman". (National Aeronautics and Space Administration,
1974). Unfortunately, the phrase "located well within" is so general as to
be of little utility in establishing any specific guidelines for the maximum
permissible reach distances in the layout of workspaces. p
The best, though far from fully satisfactory, solution to this dilem-
ma, is to select those reach studies made under one-g conditions that appear
to be most useful for NASA purposes, and to present those data (with all
their limitations) with accompanying extrapolation factors for different
environmental conditions, specifically utilizing and integrating those data
and information available on zero-g, or simulated zero-g, reaches. Selected
arm reach data and instructions for extrapolation appear in the last two
sections of this chapter. - "L
Comparability of Data from Reach Studies
Each functional arm reach study has utilized a different population
for its subjects. The earliest, and some of the most rigorous studies,
were made on military pilots, (e.g., King et al., 1947; Kennedy, 1964) and
hence represent the arm reaches of a rather highly selected, exclusively
male, fairly young, anthropometrically relatively large, and healthy. United Y
States population. More recently, comparable data have become available
V-4
UIlIMIlifiJlliiilKi&illik
ii
on a United States female population (Kennedy, 1976).
Later studies have dealt with the United States general civilian
driving population and, as such, included both males and females over a
fairly wide age range (Stoudt et al . , 1970; Chaffee, 1968; Hammond and
Roe, 1972). |r
Functional arm reach studies on non-United States populations are
considerably more limited. One of the few available was done by Bullock
(1974) on Australian pilots, both male and female. Subjects were selected
on the basis of height and weight to be anthropometrically representative
of the parent population. Comparable kinds of functional arm reach data
on non-European/American populations are not generally available.
Where data are not available, extrapolation from the measured to F
the unmeasured (for functional reach) groups becomes necessary. Fortunately,
functional arm reaches are closely related to overall body size. Fairly
good indications of the reach of different ethnic or national populations
can therefore be achieved by selecting certain percentiles of United States
data to be the equivalent of different percentiles of other populations.
For example, the 5th percentile reach on a United States population may
be the equivalent of the 10th or 20th percentile reach on another, anthro-
pometrically smaller, national or ethnic population. While this does present
some problems and potential pitfalls in the interpolation process, they '£'
are relatively small as compared to the difficulties inherent in extrapo-
lating from one set of workspace measuring conditions to another.
A second source of variance between studies is difference in measur-
ing techniques. Functional reach data have been obtained by a variety of
means and through use of different basic reference points from which the
reach measurements are indexed. Regardless of which basic reference points,
measuring systems, or techniques of recording the dimensions are used, w,
the data are employed to serve a common purpose, namely to define the outer 1
boundaries of a workspace to which the subjects can reach, given the specific
conditions under which the measurements were taken. The problem is not
primarily one of lack of comparability of measuring systems or techniques;
if the measurements are taken properly, regardless of which system is used
for a given set of conditions, the results should be generally comparable.
The major source of difficulty arises when the conditions under which the
measurements are taken, vary. The most important of these conditions is
probably body position, i.e., standing or seated; if seated, backrest angle, - t
type of restraint system, etc. The major challenge is to find the best &
way of extrapolating, or converting, functional arm reach measurements
taken under one set of conditions, to measurements that will, as accurately
as possible, describe the functional reaches under a different set of
physical workspace conditions.
V
V- 5
IllllliifiEiiililMlilLlfiflL
I i
Data Presentation
Percentiles are the single most effective way of presenting anthro-
pometric data, including functional reaches, for purposes of workspace
design and layout — provided they are properly understood and utilized. V
Obviously, the 50th percentile (which usually approximates the aver-
age), in functional reach, means that one half of the subjects in a given
population have reaches shorter than that value, and one half have longer
reaches. In similar manner, the value of the 95th percentile reach is usually
that of a fairly large, or long-armed person; only 5% of all the people
in that population have Ibnger arm reaches. However, what is generally
more important for establishing workspace layouts and central locations
are the values of the lower percentiles, i.e., the people in the population F
with the shortest reaches. For example, 5th percentile reaches are sometimes
given as the values for establishing the lower limits of reach; 957o of
the population can reach beyond the 5th percentile; only 5% of all the
people in that population have shorterarm reaches.
The practical problem here is that if it concerns the locations
of a presumably important item, then it may be totally unacceptable for
fully 57o (or one out of 20) of the population to be unable to attain that '£'
reach. This might well be true in a spacecraft. From this point of view, V
the 1st percentile value of reach would be better--only 1 percent could N
not reach this far. Ideally, if everyone must be -.ble to achieve a given
reach, then the smallest reach in the entire population must be used — this
would necessitate the use of the minimum, or single smallest reach value.
In practice, this may not be always necessary, since most reach values
usually contain a built in "safety factor." That is, under normal condi-
tions, a 5th percentile reach might be achievable by someone of the 4th,
3rd, 2nd or perhaps even 1st percentiles of "normal" reaches with extra
effort or body repositioning. Similarly a 1st percentile reach might well
be attained by all of the smaller percent of the population if there were
no really aberrantly small members of the group as presumably there would
not be in a spacecraft population.
Workspace Design as Based on Functional Reach Measurements
As noted above, a prime requirement in the layout of any workspace
is that all controls or tasks that are in any way related to manual or
pedal operation, be located so that they can be reached and operated or
performed satisfactorily by all members of that workspace population. To
achieve this, measurements are needed that define just how far given percen-
tages of that population can reach under the conditions anticipated for
that workspace. This can be most effectively accomplished by selecting
V-6
1'
I
Y
niiiiiLiiiiLiiiiiiiiik
1 1
a representative (both anthropometrically , and for other variables related to
reach) sample, determining their functional arm reaches, and defining an
overall, three-dimensional "reach envelope" that specifies both the maximum
permissible outer limits, and sometimes optimum location, for the placement
of all relevant items or tasks within the workspace. \
This ideal procedure has not always been carried out in practice.
Sometimes interpolations and extrapolations must be made from existing data,
and sometimes reach locations and outer limits must be established on the
basis of "guestimate" , perhaps supported by brief trials involving only a few
subjects. This may be relatively easy to do and can be an acceptable proce-
dure where the reach locations in the area surrounding the operator are lim-
ited in number and complexity, and can be checked rather easily for adequacy.
However, potential difficulties may arise where a number of controls or tasks J
must be located within a given area, and all clearly cannot be placed in the
area immediately surrounding the operator where they can be easily reached.
When some items must be located in less appropriate areas on the outer
periphery of the workspace, it becomes essential to know exactly where the
outer boundaries are for the accommodation of all persons in the population,
A considerable amount of information relative to the layout of work-
spaces in terms of functional reach is available, though of variable quality,
and variable relevancy to the present concerns of zero-g conditions in Space \.
Shuttle-Spacelab. It should be noted that these are not only studies of
functional reach per se (i.e.. King et al . , 1947; Kennedy, 1964; Stoudt et
al . , 1970) but also are studies that make recommendations for workspace lay-
out and design dimensions to accommodate the functional anthropometric capa-
bilities, whether known or assumed, of the intended occupants or operators.
General guidelines for the layout to workspaces can be found in the
first edition of the Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design (Ely,
Thomson, and Orlansky, 19b3; Damon, Stoudt, and McFarland, 19b3), as well as V
in Damon, Stoudt, and McFarland (1966), Van Cott and Kinkade (1972),
McCormick (1970), and Roebuck, Kroemer and Thomson (1975). Though these
studies (with the exception of the latter) do not present specific design
recommendations directly applicable to the zero-g condition — nor was this
their intent — they are all useful in terms of background, methodology, and
approach.
The first aerospace study dealing with anthropometric data and air- . -.
craft design was carried out during World War II by Randall et al . (1946). fi
The study included, in addition to body dimensions of Army Air Force pilots,
certain aspects of cockpit design and spatial accommodation in fighter and
bomber aircraft. Arm reach measurements were limited, as were related design
specifications. More recently, design specifications for military aircraft
relative to control location can be found in the human engineering section of
a U.S. Air Force Systems Command Manual (1972). The reach-related dimensions
treated here concern spatial location and travel of throttle handles, and
foot pedal location and adjustments, all relative to a neutral seat reference
point.
V-7
I'
UIllXHMIIMMIKIlilflk
These features and other factors affecting functional reach capability
are outlined and described below.
Biological Factors Affecting Functional Reaches
A wide variety of different factors influence the distances that peo-
ple can reach. Many of these are related to the innate characteristics of
the individual, such as age, sex, race, health status, physical condition,
etc. These biological variables are, for the most part, either unalterable
or relatively difficult to alter. Selection of individuals in terms of the
specific biological characteristics related to given kinds of functional
reach is, generally speaking, the only way in which such variables can be
"controlled". The effects of the more important biological variables
V-8
f
k i
A more detailed study for control location based on arm reach is that
of Garrett, Alexander and Matthews (1970) which defined reach envelopes for
the outer boundaries of controls in a series of positions with different con-
ditions of clothing and equipment, and body restraints. For each position
and condition, a design dimension was specified as follows, e.g.,: "to mani-
pulate with the right hand a rotary knob located 60° to the right of center
and 18" above the deck the knob must be placed no further than 30"
from the Seat Reference Point". All such data were taken in the seated posi-
tion, under one g, and with a degree of specificity regarding workspace con-
ditions that makes extrapolation to the zero-g, Space Shuttle environment
extremely difficult.
In spacecraft, on the basis of astronaut zero-g Skylab experience,
some specific dimensions relative to workspace layout and dimensions have
been made. These concern the optimum work surface height and change in eye
position, both relative to foot restraint position, and, most importantly,
changes in functional reach.
Certain general design features of the Space Shuttle and Spacelab
relative to functional reach considerations appear to be fairly well estab-
lished. For example, the Space Shuttle is designed to carry a crew of seven,
including pilot, co-pilot, mission specialist, and other scientific or tech-
nical personnel. The primary flight stations are organized in the usual ,1/
pllot-co-pilot relationship, with other personnel to the rear. The g for-
ces involved here in launch and re-entry will require traditional seated
positions, probably with lap and torso restraints, a factor which must be
considered in control layouts for these locations.
The Space Shuttle will also provide accommodations for all crew mem-
bers including food, waste management, sleeping and personal hygiene. For
these functions zero-g conditions will apply, as they will for all Spacelab
operations. Preliminary indications are that the basic Spacelab design will j'
be similar to that shown in Figure 1. Some form of foot restraint will be
used in Spacelab for body stabilization, which will considerably increase the
potential range of different body positions from which arm reaches can be
made, as suggested in Figure 2.
\
k
I'
UIIlIMIiMMMiLIilllllL
i i
LIGHT WITH
REFLECTOR
TOOL
STORAGE
WORK BENCH
STORAGE
OVERHEAD UTILITY
SUPPORT AND
STORAGE AREA
TOP: Core module cross section
showing workbench and console station.
BOTTOM: Typical internal rack
arrangement.
ORIZONTAL RAILS
LIGHT WITH
REFLECTOR
PRIMARY DISPLAY
AND CONTROL
CONSOLE
Figure 1. Spacelab workspaces (from Thompson, 1975)
Y
V-9
]|1I1MM11MIM£M£IIBI^^
II
Figure 2. Portable foot restraint positions
(from Thompson, 1975).
I
I'
V-10
UlllLlLlL]Llll)LllLllliii'i
I i
related to functional reach in the projected Space Shuttle-Spacelab environ-
ment are summarized below. A discussion of environmental variables follows
in the next section.
Age
Functional reach is closely related to overall body size. For all
practical purposes, full growth and maximum body size (except for weight-
related dimensions) are achieved by about age 20 in males and about 17
in females. Since the Spacelab population will be all adult, this aspect
of the aging process should not be a factor in the functional reaches of
this group, although there may be slightly reduced body sizes in middle-
aged and older groups, and, in addition, some reduction in functional reach-
es may occur because of certain degenerative or arthritic type conditions
which are more prevalent with increasing age.
Sex
Differences in overall body size, and therefore in functional reach,
are both marked and significant between the sexes. For example, men, on
the average, are roughly five and a half inches (14 cm.) taller than women,
and about 30 pounds (13.6 kg.) heavier. In static forward arm reach, perhaps
more accurately described as arm length, women's average values are three
inches (7.6 cm.) less than those for men.
t
Such sex differences also apply to functional reaches, and it is
therefore necessary to take the sex distribution of a group into account
in designing and laying out workspaces. Any workspace designed around,
and adequate for, a given male population may well be inadequate for some
percentage, perhaps substantial, of a female population. \f
Race-Ethnicity
There is a fairly wide range in overall body size, and therefore
in associated reach dimensions, among the various races, ethnic and national
groups of the world. U.S. and Northwest European populations tend to have
the largest body sizes, with Southern and Southeastern Europeans somewhat
smaller, and Orientals or Asiastics generally, though not always, smaller " t
still. (See Chapter II, Human Body Size Variability, for detailed compara-
tive data.)
Secular changes in body size, i.e., an evolutionary trend towards
larger body size over time may account for relatively small differences
between these groups, since they were measured at different times over
the past 20 years. However, by far the larger part of the differences is
due to the innate biological variability in body size between racial, nation-
al, ethnic, and socio-economic, groups. For present purposes, the extremes \^
of such variability in body size, and therefore in functional arm reach.
V-11
UIlIlHSIIllMlLIililllL
i i
to be considered are U.S. (male) populations at the upper, or larger, end,
and Asiatics (female) at the lower, or smaller, end.
Health-Physical Condition \
Since it is reasonable to assume that all persons involved in the
Space Shuttle-Spacelab program will be considerably above average in health
status and that they will also be at least average or above, for their age,
in physical condition, the changes in static and functional body dimensions
that could result from these variables should not be relevant here.
Secular Trends f
There appears to be a tendency towards an evolutionary increase in
body size over time. People have been "getting taller". Projections from
the Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory (n.d) show, for example, that a
U.S. Air Force male population comparable to the 1967 measured population
would be expected to be 0.65 inches taller in 1980. Detailed data on secular
growth trends to date and indications that such "growth" may have slowed down
for at least one population, can be found in Chapter II.
t
Environmental Factors Affecting Functional Reaches
The other, and equally important, class of variables related to func-
tional reaches are those of an environmental nature. These are usually con-
cerned with the physical characteristics and constraints of the workspace
itself, or with the type of task that is to be carried out within that work-
space. Present examples of the former are the effects of a zero-g environ- .
ment, workspace layout and design including body restraints, body position in |
the workspace, and clothing and equipment. While the effects of weightless-
ness cannot be changed, most other characteristics of the environment, work-
space and task lend "themselves to at least some modification.
Gravity
All definitive studies of both static anthropometry and functional
reach have been made on the earth's surface under conditions of standard
gravity. However, a zero-g environment will affect both static anthropometry
and, to a considerably greater extent, functional reach measurements. As has
been noted in previous chapters, for static dimensions intervertebral spinal
pressures will decrease, resulting in an apparent increase in erect and
seated body heights. Such changes, plus a concomitant body fluid redis-
tribution will tend to shift the center of mass of the whole body headward.
Since the pull of gravity on the arms will be eliminated, the shoulders will
tend to move upward, and the elbows upward and akimbo (Roebuck et al . 1975).
V-12
I
I'
lilllKUlilJliiKIMilllillL
1 1
Functional reach dimensions will increase even more markedly under
such conditions. This will result in an increase in usable working space and
increased reach areas — if the operator is either unrestrained, or only
partially restrained, in regard to body movement (Parker and West, 1973).
The basic question is, how much will functional reaches increase in a state y
of weightlessness? A precise answer is difficult because of the many vari-
ables affecting functional reach under these conditions, including not only
body restraints, but working position, clothing and equipment worn, and type
of task to be performed. These factors are discussed below.
Information on zero-g reaches, or on conditions affecting these
reaches have been obtained by: (1) observations of films of astronauts' ex-
periences in zero g, (2) astronauts' reports of their own zero-g experiences,
and (3) by measurements of simulated zero-g reaches. The latter studies have V
been made with very small numbers of subjects (five or less) and the results
therefore cannot give a clear picture of the range of reaches attainable by
any specific, anthropometrically defined, population. However, both sorts of
data do give some clear indications of the kinds of differences in functional
reach that can be expected under zero g. For example, "downward" reaches are
more difficult; there is no gravity assist. Similarly, "upward" reaches will
seem easier. Reaches to the rear of the body, with the body anchored at the
feet by a shoe restraint, exceeds reach to the front. In a zero-g
environment, ankle extension, knee flexion and vertebral extension are more -i'
effective, in terms of maximum reach, than the opposite joint movements in
the forward direction (General Electric Space Division, 1969). Again, a
major factor in zero-g reaches is the fact that it is totally unnecessary, or
even desirable, to "sit" at a work location.
Finally, it should be remembered that, while zero-g conditions may be
the constant mode for Spacelab operations, for the Space Shuttle there will
be forces up to 3-g during launch, and up to 1.5-g during a typical re-entry
(National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1975 b). Consequently, any \
controls or workspace items that must be reached and operated during these
times cannot be positioned on the basis of the greater reach capabilities
possible under zero g.
Working Positions
The normal working position of the body in a zero-g environment
differs substantially from that in a one-g environment. The seated position
is for all practical purposes eliminated, since the sitting posture is not a
natural one under these conditions (Johnson, 1975). Seats, with lap belts or
other restraints to anchor the occupants are both unnecessary, uncomfortable,
and undesirable.
The "standing" position of the body in a state of weightlessness has
been found to gradually change from initial erectness, with a straightened
spine, to a forwardly bent, semi-erect position. This has been called the
neutral body position of weightlessness, and has been defined as that
V-13
lilllMMIlIHttfiiLIIllll
k
I'
1 1
position which the body tends to naturally assume when completely relaxed and
acted upon by no external forces. It is a semi-crouched, neither sitting nor
standing posture as shown in Chapter IV, Figure 8. It will also be noted
that the normal one-g line of sight is depressed about 10° below the horizon-
tal. Under zero-g conditions, because of the natural tendency of the head \
and neck to incline downward, there is an additional depression of the line
of sight, of about 15° (Jackson, Bond, and Gundersen, 1975).
The neutral body position then, is the basic posture that should be
used in establishing workspace layout and design. Unfortunately, no adequate
body of functional reach measurements exists which have been measured from
the neutral body position. Extrapolation from one-g studies, usually in the
seated, restrainted position, will be necessary.
?
Body Restraints
While the absence of g forces will usually facilitate rather than
restrict body movement, orientation, or positioning, this same lack of gravi-
tational stabilization will leave the individual without any contrathrust
platform. Thus some sort of artificial body restraint system will be neces-
sary to provide an energy sink, or device or place for disposing of energy
(General Electric Space Division, 1969). '£■
To accomplish this, three basic types of body restraint or stabilizing
devices have been tested either under neutral buoyancy conditions on earth,
and/or actual zero-g conditions in space. These are handhold, waist, and
foot restraints (See Figure 3). In the former, the individual is stabilized
by holding on to a handgrip with one hand and performing the reach or task
with the other. This restraint affords a fairly wide rr.nge of functional
reaches, but body control is difficult, and body stability is poor. In »
addition, the use of the handhold restraint has been found to be quite I
fatiguing. For this reason, it is not recommended for any work station that
is to be used for any extended period of time.
A waist restraint (for example a belt around the waist in either the
seated, erect, or neutral body position) affords good body control and stabi-
lization, but seriously limits the range of motion and reach distances at-
tainable. It could therefore be used for workspaces in which only fairly
restricted arm reaches are necessary, but would not be appropriate where - t
longer reaches or frequent body movement, or repositioning, is required. B
The third basic system restrains the individual by the feet, either
through "Dutch Shoes", a toe-rail, a cleated shoe which interlocks with a
"floor" grid, or by suction cups attached to the sole and heel. Shoe re-
straints, generally, have been found to be definitely superior with regard to
range of motion, body control, and lack of fatigue. In neutral buoyancy
tests, the shoe restraints were judged to be excellent in "performance,
V-14
I'
lilllMMllIMMSIilLlKfl
I i
Triangle Shoes
Portable Foot
Restraint With Horizontal
Hand Hold. Vertical Rails Permit
Infinite Vertical Adjustment.
Portable Foot
Restraint - Floor
Mounting Pro-
visions
1'
Figure 3. Foot restraint system (from Thompson, 1975),
V-15
I
Y
li I I 1
KlifiillililMi
I i k
\ I
stability, and deliberateness . . .as evidenced by the subjects' ability to draw ^
continuous and steady curves". (General Electric Space Division, 1969).
Clothing and Personal Equipment \
Clothing and personal equipment worn on the body can influence func-
tional reach measurements. The effect is most commonly a decrease in reach
which can sometimes be considerable if the clothing or equipment is especial-
ly bulky or cumbersome. Most data on functional reaches have been gathered
under so-called "shirt-sleeve" conditions, (light indoor clothing) which do
not appreciably affect the measurements. Exceptions are a study by Garrett
et al. (1970) who presented data on the functional reach capabilities of
military aircrew wearing light weight coveralls (longest reaches), and full F
pressure suits, both uninflated, and inflated (shortest reaches). In addi-
tion, Laubach and Alexander (1975) measured functional reaches on a group of
Air Force pilots, first shirt-sleeved with inertia reel unlocked, and then
wearing complete winter flying assembly with inertia reel locked. Differ-
ences were substantial. Under the very worst conditions for example, it was
found that 5th percentile reaches with flying clothing and inertia reel may
only be about 60% of shirt-sleeve reaches. More commonly the difference
ranges between 70% and 90%, clearly a very significant and practical differ-
ence . '|!
If space suits were required during any phase of the Space Shuttle-
Spacelab intravehicular operations, this would probably necessitate a sub-
stantial reduction in any design reach dimensions established for shirt-
sleeve operations. The extent of these differences would have to be deter-
mined from "with-and-without" studies using the specific space suits and gear
to be employed in that mission. For example, in the underwater, neutral
buoyancy tests of functional reach (General Electric Space Division, 1969), _.
measurements were made with the NASA Gemini Spacesuit, but the experimenters I
noted that direct "interpolation of the values for pressure-suit access vol-
umes is inappropriate unless suits with the same dynamic characteristics are
utilized."
For extravehicular activity, the problem of functional reach dimen-
sions would presumably be of relatively little consequence because of body
mobility. And, since normal intravehicular activity and operations for both
Space Shuttle and Spacelab are planned for pressurized non space-suited con- . -i
ditions (Anonymous, 1975), it should be possible to utilize shirt-sleeved fi
functional reach dimensions for design purposes in these vehicles. There
are, it is true, some differences between clothing worn in aerospacecraf t in
zero g and one g. Zero-g clothing has more and larger pockets — to temporari-
ly store and carry small articles. This should not affect functional arm
reach to any appreciable extent. Special restraint shoes, oxygen pack and
mask, and communications equipment might be worn (National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, 1974), but again, these should not substantially affect
functional arm reach (though the suction cup shoe restraint would likely add
one to two inches to stature) . Special areas requiring the use of space
suits, or emergency conditions may, of course, necessitate other provisions.
V-16
I'
]lllIM]i£lilM]iSi[iiIilliiL
V-17
f
I I
Task to Be Performed
The length of a functional arm reach is clearly dependent upon the
kind of task or operation to be performed by that reach. For example, tasks
requiring only finger-tip pressure on a push button could be located at or
near the outer limits of arm reach as defined by the finger tip. This would
be, essentially, absolute maximum attainable functional reach. However, an-
other task may require rotation of a control knob between thumb and forefin-
ger; this would result in a reduction of the above maximum attainable func-
tional reach of about 2.5 inches (6.4 cm.). Full hand grasp of a control
level would reduce maximum reach even more, perhaps by 5 inches (12.7 cm.).
Where two-handed operation, or greater precision, or continuous operation,
are required, the task must be located still closer to the operator, and
maximum functional reach will decrease accordingly.
It should be noted that the maximum reaches referred to above, are
those made to the outer limits of the workspace. They represent the farthest
distance at which a control or task can be located if necessary and still be
operated or performed by the person(s) with the smallest functional reaches
in the group. These are not necessarily the optimum locations for such
placements, which may well be closer in to the body.
These considerations apply equally well in zero g as to one g, though .t,"
some minor differences in reach and performance have been reported. For ex-
ample, any "downward" reach or reach involving bending at the waist will be
judged more difficult (though only slightly so) in zero g because of the ab-
sence of gravity assist in "pulling" the arm or body down. "Upward" reaches
would similarly be judged easier. The general concensus of astronaut Skylab
experience was that most manual tasks were performed as easily, or more easi-
ly, in a zero-g environment (when foot restraints were used) because of the
greater flexibility in body positioning, and the increased efficiency in han-
dling large masses (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1975c). V
The Data: Functional Reach Measurements
Considerations in Data Selection
There is no single study, or body of data, or functional reach meas-
urement that is immediately and directly applicable to the design of work-
spaces for the specific environmental conditions and populations anticipated ^
for Space Shuttle and Spacelab through the year 1990. As noted in the dis-
cussions above, functional reach studies are always made under a certain set
of prescribed conditions for a given population. The intent is to obtain
data that can be used in the design of one specific kind of workspace, under
conditions and with populations similar to those for which the reach data
were obtained.
If
UilllLUlllLllllllllLll
I i
After review of all available functional arm reach studies that might
be applicable to the present design situation, the single most appropriate
set of data was determined to be that of Kennedy for both men (1964) and
women (1976). Reasons for the selection of these data are as follows: (1)
the experimental design, measuring apparatus, and data analysis and 1'
presentation were as carefully planned and well controlled as those of any *
other functional reach study and better than most; (2) they are the only
studies which present separate, but comparable, data for both male and female
populations; (3) while the niimber of subjects, 20 for males and 30 for
females, is fairly small, they were specially selected anthropometrically to
accurately represent the size range of the parent populations. Certain
disadvantages of the Kennedy study for present purposes, i.e., seated
position with specific seat back and seat pan angles, shoulder restraints,
etc., are considerable, but are common to almost all other functional reach P
studies that might have been selected except for the underwater neutral
buoyancy tests. Although the latter were intended to simulate zero-g
conditions, the subject population was too small and too anthropometrically
atypical to be of any real utility here.
Arm Reach Data - Males
The Kennedy data were obtained on 20 subjects selected to be anthro- X
pometrically representative of the U.S. Air Force population. Their dimen-
sions, and those of the female subjects, are presented in Table 1. All func-
tional reach measurements were taken with the subject on a hard, unyielding
seat with a backrest angle of 103°, and a seat angle of 6°. The reach task
was to grasp with the right hand a small knob between the thumb and forefin-
ger and push away until the arm was fully extended, with the shoulders still
in contact with the seat back. Subjects wore light indoor clothing that did
not appreciably restrict their reach.
The measurements of reach was as follows. Reaches were made to a
series of vertical planes emanating from the seat reference point (intersec-
tion of planes of seat and backrest surfaces in seat midline), starting at
0°, or straight ahead, and at 15° increments to the right and left to 180°,
or directly to the rear. At each of these angles, reaches were made to a
series of horizontal planes, at 5 inch (12.7 cm.) intervals, starting at the
seat reference point to 45 inches (114.3 cm.) above this point. All reach
dimensions presented in the following tables describe the horizontal distance
between the two points defined by (1) the position of a knob being grasped by
the thumb and forefinger, and (2) the seat reference vertical, (SRV), or ver-
tical line through the seat reference point (SRP). See Figures 4-13 accom-
panying the tabular data for further clarification.
1'
\
In the following tables the "minimum" value column presents the single
shortest reach made in the sample of 20 subjects. It is very roughly
equivalent to a 1st percentile value, but since it is based on only one indi-
vidual, the values may be somewhat variable. The 5th percentile value is V
that of the individual who had the next to shortest reach (or 19th of
V-18
UllfiSlIiMMflfilLftAllIiL
I i
the 20 in rank). The 50th percentile is the arithmetic mean of the 10th and
11th values, and the 95th percentile is that of the individual with the sec-
ond longest reach.
Arm Reach Data - Females =■
These data were obtained on 30 subjects selected to be anthropomet-
rically representative of the U.S. Air Force female population. The sub-
jects' dimensions are presented in Table 1. Conditions of measurement for
the functional reaches were comparable in equipment and technique to those
for the male subjects, i.e., taken with the subject on a hard, unyielding
seat with a backrest angle of 103°, and a seat angle of 6°. The reach task
and the unrestrictive nature of the clothing worn by the female subjects were c
also the same as the men's. Reaches were made for a series of vertical
planes emanating from the seat reference point, starting at 0°, or straight
ahead, and at 15° increments to the right and left to 180°, or directly to
the rear. At each of these angles, reaches were made to a series of horizon-
tal planes at 6 inch (15.2 cm.) intervals starting at the seat reference
point to 42 inches (106.7 cm.) above the point. In this latter regard the
women's study varied slightly from the men's in which reaches were measured
at 5 inch (12.7 cm.) intervals and extended to 45 inches (114.3 cm.) above
SRP. Recording of "minimum" values was omitted in the women's study. ,1/
Conversion Technique for Different Workspace Conditions
As noted, the above data on functional arm reach for males and females
were taken under standardized conditions, i.e., seated position, hard seat,
103° backrest, 9° seat angle, shoulders in contact with backrest during
reach, and a one-g environment. These data can therefore be expected to
apply directly only to seated workspaces with similar configurations. |
Gravity Conditions - Body Movement Restrained
For the Space Shuttle (as opposed to Spacelab) design, the seated
position for flight crew, mission specialist, and other scientific or techni-
cal personnel during the g forces of launch and re-entry, will be the work-
space conditions to which the present data are most directly applicable. If ._
seat configurations are generally similar to those of the simulated U.S. Air ^
Force pilots' seat used in determining the present arm reach data (Tables 2-
19), then the latter may be used directly in establishing the layout of these
workspaces and control locations — subject only to possible adjustment because
of different sized operator groups which is discussed in the next section on
conversion techniques for different populations.
V-19
I'
llIIIflMSIJiMiilKIlIIliL
ri
n
vO
vO
>»
«*
a
o^
O
«M
f^^
o
o
O^
«n
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
>»
CM
CM
•-4
ft
o
^rf
o
"-^
^^
f^
■>^
^^
^i'
>^
•
^
w
yO eo
• •
o o
00
^ 00
o o
V
o
CO
«* •* »-t
>o <o m
en
eo
eo
a-
eo
m iri CM CM CM fn
00
•-I
n
o
o
o>
en
eo
r»
NO
en
lO
•
•
«
•
«
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
o
<t
«*
St
ON
r-*
eo
CM
NO
CM
<»
>o
CM
>o
CM
en
CM
CM
CM
i-<
^
CM
1^
f-l
B
N^
\^
1-1
\^
\^
'I-'
>^
N—'
^^
N—*
>^
>«^
(0
'
'
'
£
eo
en
«*
!>•
vO
ON
«n
<*
<*
m
ON
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
CM
vO
vO
en
m
l-t
CM
CM
r*.
NO
^
>o
in
eo
r>.
m
r^
en
«»
m
en
«*
^-s
<"v
^
^^
^\
^~\
^
^
("-V
^s
^^
«-l
cn
CM
>o
o
CN4
en
>*
CM
St
en
m
NO
>o
en
CM
ITI
«»
«n
NO
r~
CM
r^
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
«f>
CNJ
o
T-l
^
i-l
i-i
I-4
O
o
O
O
•
>^^
>■•
CM
s^
N^
N^
N-»
N./
N-^
^
v^
^
•
1
1
1
o
m
m
m
NO
cn
1-4
r»
00
00
1-4
r^
en
>*
o
00
NO
ON
m
00
lO
ON
o
CM
II
z
0)
l-<
(0
ON m
en m en en 1-1 1-1
o>
NO
00
en
CM
o
CM
CM
o
NO
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
r-
o^
m
NO
■*
CM
>*
00
■*
c^
r-
m
CM
NO
NO
en
CM
m
en
en
1-4
1-4
>-'
1-1
>«^
N.^
1-4
>-^
1
s^
'^
N-^
^
Nta^
1
c
(0
00
CM
CM
m
m
ON
o
•
NO
en
m
ON
0)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
X.
NO
u->
CM
1-4
1-1
NO
r^
NO
00
ON
CJN
r~
r>
ON
NO
00
00
ON
n
-*
1-1
en
f
v
00
c
t-l
•H
1-1
4J
to
J3
u
3
•u
00
•H
l-t
00
J3
J=
<<-%
c
in
1-1
g
c
4J
u
J5
m
fl
(0
0)
00
00
4J
a>
4J
•»
A
?
^
1-1
c
c
•n
^
•s
u
4J
U-l
lU
01
n
4J
4J
•H
A
n
B
?
.—1
l-t
01
T3
c
x:
in
00
01
x;
^
V4
te
•H
00
•H
u
kl
•0
0)
Xi
9i
s— ^
^s
•H
•«
0)
u^
te
l-t
c
x:
0)
U
(A
0)
u
4::
l-t
Q)
0)
«
*j
c
f— t
^
c
h
^
Jd
<0
J=
»4
1
J=
00
^
(d
o
0)
00
c
e
u
u
1
c
1
iH
u
•H
01
«
00
•H
01)
g
0)
E
0)
^
g
0)
M
>s
M
4J
c
0)
•H
•H
0)
3
TJ
r-4
T3
c
N-^
3
J3
•H
J5
g
4J
tl
B
1-H
<B
u
l-t
g
4J
eo
4J
1-1
3
0)
"O
*J
3
«
n
1-t
4J
0)
M
c
E
s
h
c
4J
CO
•H
00
w
01
1-1
>N
3
J5
(0
3
iH
J3
Q
<
to
»
w
u
<
[b
<
£
to
b
s
m
«
W
l^
V-20
UIIlMMfilMiMSKMllllIMi.
TABULATED ARM REACH DATA:
MEN AND WOMEN
V-21
I i
V
¥
Y
I
If
illllMMllIIMIMlIilllL
I i
TABLE 2
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A PLANE THROUGH THE
SEAT REFERENCE POINT. HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV- V
See Figure 4 *
An J
lie to
)r Right
Minimum
Percentiles
Left c
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
44.5
(17.5)
52.6
(20.7)
63.5
(25.0)
R
45
41.1
(16.2)
49.5
(19.5)
55.1
(21.7)
66.0
(26.0)
R,
60
44.5
(17.5)
52.1
(20.5)
56.4
(22.2)
66.5
(26.2)
R
75
43.7
(17.2)
50.8
(20.0)
56.4
(22.2)
66.0
(26.0)
R
90
43.2
(17.0)
49.5
(19.5)
56.4
(22.2)
64.8
(25.5)
R
105
41.1
(16.2)
47.5
(18.7)
55.9
(22.0)
64.0
(25.2)
R
120
38.1
(15.0)
46.2
(18.2)
52.6
(20.7)
62.2
(24.5)
R
135
33.0
(13.0)
41.9
(16.5)
48.3
(19.0)
59.7
(23.5)
R
150
35.6
(14.0)
41.9
(16.5)
51.3
(20.2)
R
165
180
33.0
(13.0)
43.2
(17.0)
/-22
I'
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses. V
The original data were measured to the nearest k inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
UIlfiMMliliSiiMllMMfilllli
ii
V
lO
O S W ~ <M « :
c
•
o
■M
N
c
'r-
•^
s-
o
o
Q.
<U
re
O
c
o
O)
■M
S-
O)
^
4-
o
O)
re
s-
0)
S-
-M
re
cn
<u
c
1/1
f—
o.
(U
</»
.c
re
■»->
s-
Ol^
cr>
v>
3
.
O
c
s-
(U
^
s:
+->
•
<u
s-
1'
Ol
If
V-23
li I 1 1
illlklllL
I I I I i. I
i i
TABLE 3
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL
PLANE 12.5 CENTIMETERS (5 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT
REFERENCE POINT. HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV*
See Figure 5
An;
gle to
3r Right
Minimum
Percentiles
Left (
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
55.9
(22.0)
60.2
(23.7)
66.0
(26.0)
74.9
(29.5)
R
45
59.7
(23.5)
64.0
(25.2)
69.1
(27.2)
76.2
(30.0)
R
60
60.2
(23.7)
65.3
(25.7)
70.4
(27.7)
76.2
(30.0)
R
75
61.0
(24.0)
65.3
(25.7)
69.9
(27.5)
76.7
(30.2)
R
90
61.0
(24.0)
65.3
(25.7)
69.9
(27.5)
78.0
(30.7)
R
105
60.2
(23.7)
64.0
(25.2)
68.6
(27.0)
76.2
(30.0)
R
120
58.4
(23.0)
62.2
(24.5)
67.3
(26.5)
73.7
(29.0)
R
135
54.6
(21.5)
57.7
(22.7)
63.5
(25.0)
71.1
(28.0)
R
150
56.4
(22.2)
65.3
(25.7)
R
165
180
48.8
(19.2)
53.8
(21.2)
V-24
''Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest \ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
I
1'
\
I'
llIllllfilMilMlI&IliI]i>.
OJ
c:
ro
•
r—
4J
a.
C
"r—
n—
o
n3
Q.
4->
c
Q)
o
O
N
C
•r-
OJ
S-
i-
o
<u
j=: <+-
<u
ta
t.
o
-l->
4->
(O
<u
j=
J/)
o
(0
QJ
(U
^
t.
+->
D1
QJ
c
>
•^-
O
Q.XS
to
rtJ
fO
s-
t/>
O)
QJ
x:
to
o
-
c
(U
in
s-
I
I
Y
V-25
lillllHSlIKMIM
I I I I
I i
TABLE 4
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
25.4 CENTIMETERS (10 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 6
Angle to
Left or Right
Minimum
P(
srcentiles
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
34.3
(13.5)
L
75
43.7
(17.2)
L
60
41.9
(16.5)
53.3
(21.0)
L
45
49.5
(19.5)
58.9
(23.2)
L
30
53.3
(21.0)
62.7
(24.7)
L
15
55.9
(22.0)
66.5
(26.2)
R
15
R
30
66,
.5
(26,
.2)
68,
.6
(27.0)
74.2
(29.2)
83.8
(33.0)
R
45
69,
.1
(27,
.2)
71,
.6
(28.
.2)
77.5
(30.5)
85.6
(33.7)
R
60
71,
.1
(28.0)
73.
.7
(29,
.0)
78.0
(30.7)
85.1
(33.5)
R
75
71.
.6
(28.
.2)
74,
.2
(29,
.2)
78.0
(30.7)
85.1
(33.5)
R
90
71.
.6
(28.
.2)
74.
.2
(29,
.2)
78.7
(31.0)
85.1
(33.5)
R
105
70.
.4
(27.
.7)
72.
.9
(28,
.7)
77.5
(30.5)
83.1
(32.7)
R
120
67.
.8
(26.
.7)
70.
.4
(27,
.7)
75.4
(29.7)
80.0
(31.5)
R
135
66.
.5
(26,
.2)
71.6
(28.2)
78.0
(30.7)
R
150
64.0
(25.2)
72.9
(28.7)
R
165
180
V-26
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest ^ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
1
1'
i
Y
llBllMl(lilMM]iIM£lLiilIi[L
1 1
o
o
m
o
at
s
O
O
o
-(E
0= (r
IM
O gf
^\
/o^ «
in
•" .
lO>^\
.^ 1 o
J
K)
» \ >
<^«
^
/
5 fe
/^
^
KS
^ •
O
^"^Sifc^ / f m\
\ ^
«/ /
jb'f
A ^
M
« r^/j
\^ \
y
/ y
/*
Ur
<o
<r Le/-t>-C
\ l\
r^
J //
^^
rf^
K
^^_^^^^_SLf _* - —
^^
&
^
^^
O
F^^^r^ >-
1^
^v.
o
CO
o
1— h==«T
pL-^HH
^m.
"*
i— i*^^u?
^
J < JC L \Z>
^r^" '^y
/fll^T^
N^
''''**—^
.^^^
rri'--V^
T>>
r^
t/i vU'
sN
\
--^
■^
• ^■' \ V
^c
-A \ X
2 ><r
\V
\
^\^
o
in
(£
tATl
\\
\
\ °
_i
ro ■!->
>— c
Q-'r-
•? / f/ /
\ >
V
\ in
o
-1 o/ <y /
\
\
N —
O -1
1— a.
w >
' /
\
\
in
lO
_j
n3
♦ /
/
\
\
■M <u
(0
o/
m
o
>
o c
-1
K
O o
-I
"r- &.
_i
!) :^
O
i- <u
O <4-
s-
■M
o re
■4-> 0)
.c
]..
o <u
1
• s
v:~.
re J=
Wo*
M CO «
.
s
"o
« .
^
"o
\
(U
•
'*'
05 >
w '^
J
. ".o y^
■C
E O
♦
/
X/""
V 1
y 1
•I- ^
o
/,
Vi/
a. re
00
/ /
re to
:
/ /
— >,
.
s- cu
tf)
' /
•^
in 1
01J=
in
/
X
\
1 1
o
/
A
r
\
— *
</1 c
— 'r—
/ /
/ \
(
C
' /
I s
OJ o
/
J
^^
i^
V.
STi—
c
-A
/
r
^
?
\
vd
V
<t
^
-i-
:»^
T-
(U
*,_
■^
S-
^
:3
~
CT>
•r—
Ll_
m
'«
lO
1
=
o
J
W 3
K
« .
"lO w
* o
2
s
X
r
O
♦•
10
O
r
S
> <
J (
—
f
I
r
b
¥
V-27
IlIIIMMSIMllilM
1 1 I i L
m
TABLE 5
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
38.1 CENTIMETERS (15 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV."
See Figure 7
Ang
le to
Dr Right
Minimum
Percent!]
.es
Left (
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
44.5
(17.5)
L
75
50.8
(20.0)
L
60
48.8
(19.2)
58.4
(23.0)
L
45
48.3
(19.0)
54.6
(21.5)
65.3
(25.7)
L
30
53.3
(21.0)
55.1
(21.7)
61.0
(24.0)
69.1
(27.2)
L
15
57.2
(22.5)
58.9
(23.2)
66.0
(26.0)
72.9
(28.7)
61.5
(24.2)
62.7
(24.7)
72.9
(28.7)
78.7
(31.0)
R
15
66.0
(26.0)
67.3
(26.5)
77.5
(30.5)
86.4
(34.0)
R
30
71.6
(28.2)
72.4
(28.5)
80.0
(31.5)
88.9
(35.0)
R
45
74.9
(29.5)
76.2
(30.0)
83.1
(32.7)
90.2
(35.5)
R
60
76.2
(30.0)
78.7
(31.0)
82.6
(32.5)
88.1
(34.7)
R
75
76.2
(30.0)
80.0
(31.5)
82.6
(32.5)
88.1
(34.7)
R
90
76.7
(30.2)
78.7
(31.0)
82.6
(32.5)
88.1
(34.7)
R
105
76.2
(30.0)
78.0
(30.7)
81.8
(32.2)
87.6
(34.5)
R
120
73.7
(29.0)
74.9
(29.5)
81.3
(32.0)
85.6
(33.7)
R
135
76.2
(30.0)
82.6
(32.5)
R
150
74.9
(29.5)
R
165
180
V-28
V
V
Y
I
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest h, inch and are if
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch. *•
UllfiMMlilJilililMfiUlIlI
1 1
O
« ° ft
» N 2) -
o
O
o „ K * <r
pj
IT
(0 >o
1
oc
o
E 3l^^=
^^
^
2 1:^^^\ k
//
^
)(
lO
5 „
'>=.'o/Vx V \ 2
/ /
/^
r\
o
o
>V/ \ \ \
/ /
/
^V-
^ f
m
/r« \ \ \
I / y
Jr
/ / r;v^ Xj-V-X
1 / y^
J^
•^
K
K^
/ / X
/^
1
^
rrr3^^^^J^5J
/^
^
—
. '
^ 1 1 '1 i****J^^
L©
«
'"""^^
o
flD
o
^ 1 A\^V-J».W-*VU>r
.S
^^
^^"■■■■.^
^^^^
■"
4^
^/S
W
\^
\
"^
^^
6 ai^
A \ \
S
\\^
\
m
OJ
_i
\ \
V
^>^ «o
c .
<
\ \
\
> 3
n3 4-)
1— E
O-'i-
5 / 7 7
\ \
\
o
« / / /
\ >
V
X
in
o
-• o/ / /
\
\
3
1— Q.
2 / /
\
\
lO
+-> (U
* o' /
\
tfv
lO
c o
O o'
)
o
=i ^
o c
• « * m
</]
•r- S-
-1 K O O
-1
5- <U
-■ 2 3
;h to a ho
! seat ref
\J UJ
K
nj ^
« *o 2 ° 'L.
v^^
CD +->
. jO rt '*' N «0
z
\ ^
O)
O « 1
I
o
v:>".
a> >
* « 1
—
_
y
E o
m 1
y
k
"lO
y^
V
•1- J2
5 ♦
f
\
^
^ V.
,> 1
Q. (O
o
1
J
y
v>
/ 1
to
lO
J
/ ^
/^
V
(O </)
/
( /^
/
S- O)
s
/
\
-^
/
I 1
cn^
lO
/
\
^
lO 1
o
»
/ /
\
I
1 1
^ _ 1 1
lO c
' )
\
r
c
/
/
y^
\'
r
\
A
r
N,
1 —
^r
TnT
V-
^^^
/
(U
Xi
^^s
^i
^•^
S-
■-~3
^^^
3
^
^
_^^
CT>
•r-
Lu
V
»
"in
ir
)
o
J
m s
_
K
m
"tf
) w
* 'o =
s
s
:
C
5
^
» c
! ;
"c
c
> 1!
4
^ -
i
I'
V-29
lillllUMIiiMlifilliEIIlKl
I i
TABLE 6
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
50.8 CENTIMETERS (20 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE TROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 8
Angle to
Left or Right
Minimum
Percentiles
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
35.6
(14.0)
47.5
(18.7)
L
75
45.7
(18.0)
54.6
(21.5)
L
60
43.2
(17.0)
44.5
(17.5)
52.1
(20.5)
62.2
(24.5)
L
45
46.2
(18.2)
49.5
(19.5)
57.7
(22.7)
67.8
(26.7)
L
30
51.3
(20.2)
54.6
(21.5)
62.7
(24.7)
71.6
(28.2)
L
15
57.2
(22.5)
59.7
(23.5)
67.8
(26.7)
75.4
(29.7)
63.5
(25.0)
64.8
(25.5)
72.9
(28.7)
80.5
(31.7)
R
15
69.1
(27.2)
71.1
(28.0)
77.5
(30.5)
86.4
(34.0)
R
30
73.7
(29.0)
76.2
(30.0)
81.3
(32.0)
90.7
(35.7)
R
45
77.5
(30.5)
78.7
(31.0)
85.1
(33.5)
91.9
(36.2)
R
60
80.0
(31.5)
81.3
(32.0)
85.6
(33.7)
91.9
(36.2)
R
75
80.0
(31.5)
81.8
(32.2)
86.4
(34.0)
92.7
(36.5)
R
90
80.5
(31.7)
81.8
(32.2)
86.4
(34.0)
91.4
(36.0)
R
105
80.0
(31.5)
80.5
(31.7)
85.1
(33.5)
90.7
(35.7)
R
120
77.5
(30.5)
83.8
(33.0)
90.2
(35.5)
R
135
87.6
(34.5)
R
150
R
165
180
V-30
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest ^ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
I
Y
Y
]iIlflMMSlM]i£&iI£IiIli
\ i
o
O
8 ^o
(T (^
40 O \
/ (r m
in
* !ii\j^^~
*
v'^^^^U^^
3^^^)C (T
fc
0^
^//\^ \
/ ^/^^^V'
lO
o
\
/ r^
o: _
o:
>
/y
y\ \ V
/
/ / \y
«o
Trs^
# x^ \ \
/
/ / ^^^
»
It
(^ N. \A. /
/ / .y'''^
K
o:
at-i
/ y''^ ^--
,- — "
^
e^.M
y^^^^-^""^^^
[ "
— ^^ * ^"^Nw
3p
^d3^?^^
*^
■ <5
i
s
«^^^%c^iyi
^^^^
^»:=i"
■^'^t
'A
\ X^\.
e
2
^
\
o>^
c •
e '
o
o
)r
/^v/
\\ \
o
in
1 — C
O-T-
o
-1
V /
\ \ *
\ \ "
\ * ro
^ ° J
-J
r— Q.
+-> 0)
»
C O
_i
/
>
O C
O o/ .
» N
a:
N Ol
• « o
_i N 5
S 3
©
_, o*
_j
O ^4-
-J
h to a h
seat re
C ~l
u <u
N»
(O x:
s
L 2
s
ai >
s * 1
K
:
^
T^'' 1
c o
« 1
/\
•o^
\
•1- ^
o
♦
p
J^
/
y '
Q. n3
t/1
lO
z'
/
1 1
<T3 </1
S- QJ
.
/
\
^
/
lO 1
cn^
V)
/
I
>
o
n
_ ^^%
L
» _
\\
1
__<
Men's
20 in
r
' n
J^
OO
■
^^^^
^
^
"SI
13
v^
Ll_
V
"in
1
r
1
-1
C
■>
1
K
II
=■ 1
lO >
1 =,
O «
' S » =.
3 "i
o '<
.' o
lO f
>a «
M
\
1'
k
r
V-31
lilllMllilMIiilMfiiilfiiik
I i
TABLE 7
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
63.5 CENTIMETERS (25 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE EROM THE SRV,*
See Figure 9
At) cr
le to
Dr Right
Percentiles
Ang
Left (
Minimum
5
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
45.0
(17.7)
L
90
39.9
(15.7)
51.3
(20.2)
L
75
48.8
(19.2)
56.4
(22.2)
L
60
45.0
(17.7)
46.2
(18.2)
54.6
(21.5)
62.7
(24.7)
L
45
48.8
(19.2)
50.8
(20.0)
58.9
(23.2)
69.1
(27.2)
L
30
54.6
(21.5)
57.2
(22.5)
63.5
(25.0)
72.4
(28.5)
L
15
58.9"
(23.2)
61.0
(24.0)
68.6
(27.0)
75.4
(29.7)
63.5
(25.0)
66.5
(26.2)
72.4
(28.5)
80.0
(31.5)
R
15
69.1
(27.2)
71.6
(28.2)
76.7
(30.2)
85.1
(33.5)
R
30
74.2
(29.2)
76.7
(30.2)
82.6
(32.5)
89.4
(35.2)
R
45
77.5
(30.5)
78.7
(31.0)
85.1
(33.5)
90.7
(35.7)
R
60
78.7
(31.0)
80.0
(31.5)
85.6
(33.7)
94.0
(37.0)
R
75
80.0
(31.5)
81.3
(32.0)
85.1
(33.5)
92.7
(36.5)
R
90
80.5
(31.7)
81.8
(32.2)
85.6
(33.7)
91.9
(36.2)
R
105
79.2
(31.2)
80.0
(31.5)
85.1
(33.5)
91.4
(36.0)
R
120
77.5
(30.5)
84.3
(33.2)
90.2
(35.5)
R
135
88.9
(35.0)
R
150
R
165
180
V-32
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest h, inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
f
1
y
I'
liillMIIlMMfili^ilAlIllL
i i
e
o
« ° fi
K 5 2 o
o a: * K <M
in
in
«
O
VxSi^V \
/ /^O
in
lO i
/^
a: „
'H
^^^ \ \
/ / o /
/ / ''y
>
5 /
jk^ \ \ \
^
K
o
^^
T-^JTr^a /r>
o
4— -t3c
^IU*-i VUg «^
^\
«>
Wi,
A ^"^^
s
\x\
\
o
-• ^
x\ \
\ !£
n3 -M
o
o
L
--•
\ \ ^
\
«>^ _i
o
in
>— C
T
o
J o
^ / 1 \
>
-1
1 — Q.
" / /
IC
4-> QJ
^ J 1
\ *
f«5
C O
O o
\ o
e <M
IJ
O C
N CU
w « " « —
•r- S-
_l K O O -J
>
t- (U
-• 5 3
a;
O <+-
w
^ 0)
©
O fO
+-> 0)
to
L
O QJ
. ■ ■
\^-v
IT3 SZ
s
o
s 1
lO
o
•0
« O
s
s
O
>
)
V 1
Ol +->
S-
en >
c O
■1- J2
o
lO
/"
/^
7
y
(/I
(O 10
.
\
\
•>
/^
1
i- Ol
"lO
,\
\
^
« 1
cn^
lO
M
\
^
'l
1
o
— 'r—
\
r
\
I
1
c
■"
X
•v I
<U IT)
•^^
L
^,
s: CM
f
X
'
r
o
-
L_
<■>*,
_2
1
N
^
=^
^
?^
es
i~
3
o>
•r-
U-
.
_ 1
"lO
1
in
"c
>
-1
K
> s
m
ir
) w
* 'o =
.
J
>
♦ •? o « o le "
"
■•
t K
i>
«VJ «
M
I'
V-33
U 1 1 I I H
1 H X M I i
£11111
li
TABLE 8
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
76.2 CENTIMETERS (30 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE "FROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 10
Angle to
Left or Right
Mini
Percentiles
mum
5
50
95
L
165
47.5
(18.7)
L
150
48.8
(19.2)
L
135
50.8
(20.0)
L
120
47.5
(18.7)
L
105
48.3
(19.0)
L
90
42.4
(16.7)
52.6
(20.7)
L
75
47.5
(18.7)
57.2
(22.5)
L
60
43.2
(17.0)
43.7
(17.2)
52.6
(20.7)
62.2
(24.5)
L
45
46.2
(18.2)
48.3
(19.0)
57.2
(22.5)
67.3
(26.5)
L
30
50.0
(19.7)
54.6
(21.5)
62.2
(24.5)
71.6
(28.2)
L
15
55.9
(22.0)
60.2
(23.7)
67.8
(26.7)
74.9
(29.5)
60.2
(23.7)
64.8
(25.5)
72.4
(28.5)
78.7
(31.0)
R
15
66.0
(26.0)
69.1
(27.2)
75.4
(29.7)
83.8
(33.0)
R
30
70.4
(27.7)
73.7
(29.0)
80.0
(31.5)
86.9
(34.2)
R
45
72.9
(28.7)
76.7
(30.2)
81.8
(32.2)
88.1
(34.7)
R
60
76.2
(30.0)
78.7
(31.0)
83.1
(32.7)
90.7
(35.7)
R
75
78.0
(30.7)
79.2
(31.2)
83.8
(33.0)
90.2
(35.5)
R
90
78.7
(31.0)
79.2
(31.2)
84.3
(33.2)
90.7
(35.7)
R
105
78.0
(30.7)
78.7
(31.0)
83.8
(33.0)
89.4
(35.2)
R
120
76.7
(30.2)
82.6
(32.5)
88.1
(34.7)
R
135
87.6
(34.5)
R
150
R
165
180
49.5
51.3
(19.5)
(20.2)
'^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest hi inch
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an
and are
inch.
V
I
1'
k
I'
V-34
lllllMMfililMlilLilMKlIl^i
i i
o
o
in
N
e
o
^
o
8
Of
O
CM
o ** \ ° ~
\ /
in
lO
S /v^-§ \
A
. ^ o
O ^^^f f/t^^ \ \
/
V/ «
— iru~^ \ \
I / y
/
^
^ w
°'-wA/^^^'*V-^Sl\\'
y//
y^
y^
K
>:
o
^|.--K;::^ft\-^5i^Ao<*T«
\
o
o
"^^^^
1 Ml
0)
"I iT'WW *'
^
1
o ^jfc^ 1 \ VjC^^^^^y^^y
{pm
n:
3^
~^^
<u
At
A \ \
c
2 V>0^^/-f1^
\ W
/^
V.
fO -t-)
J j^^C ^^/^^t /
\ \^
V
^
N. ^
-— c
J^^ ^^^^^^^^^^"^^^
Jt^
^v
a.T-
"^X
\
Sy
>^ _l
o
o
\ \
X
1 — Q.
lO y' / /
\ N
V
\
lO
(O
« / /
\
\
c
^ 3
\
\
ikj
lO
-I
o c
O O /
m
O
O
N 0)
•1- S-
«) «
-1 N O
_l
or
(0
O 4-
_| ff) —
^ <U
-1 -•
G
to
O 10
+-> O)
to
(O -C
. s ■
f-.
O) +->
s O "' O *
v:>-
i-
. » ^ f^ e<l <0
.
>i
-J
<u
O « 1
- « •
L
"^
o
A
CD >
c o
m
K
2
ji
>/'" '
•.- J3
r «r
A
m
/v.
> •
Q. (O
o
\ 1
y
V
^ 1
CO
lO
\ \
y
(O (/)
\ >
/
A
S- OJ
:
I
(
^>
/
oix:
«
\
\
\
^
>o 1
(J
in
\
\
\
>
J
J__l
to c
\
\
\
(
0) o
r
Mi.
_V
^
■-
r
^
\
s: po
n
O
^
=2(
-5
-^
^
^
3
o>
•r—
U.
'«
lA
lO
1 ■
s
1
O
-1
» s
s
OE
n
m
«A
« a ^
B
1
t <
■
'c
»
♦
' o
in
c
M
» -
\
1'
k
I'
V-35
UIIlMMMIMliMIM
If 1 I L
n
TABLE 9
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
88.9 CENTIMETERS (35 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 11
T
Angle to
Left or Right
Minimum
Percentiles
50
95
V-36
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
37.3
(14.7)
53.3
34.8
(13.7)
50.8
33.5
(13.2)
48.3
27.2
(10.7)
33.5
(13.2)
47.5
31.0
(12.2)
35.6
(14.0)
47.5
32.3
(12.7)
34.8
(13.7)
39.4
(15.5)
50.8
36.1
(14.2)
38.1
(15.0)
43.7
(17.2)
53.3
38.6
(15.2)
40.6
(16.0)
47.5
(18.7)
54.6
41.1
(16.2)
43.7
(17.2)
52.1
(20.5)
62.7
45.7
(18.0)
48.8
(19.2)
57.2
(22.5)
66.5
48.8
(19.2)
53.3
(21.0)
62.7
(24.7)
68.6
52.6
(20.7)
56.4
(22.2)
67.3
(26.5)
72.4
57.7
(22.7)
62.7
(24.7)
70.4
(27.7)
78.7
62.2
(24.5)
67.8
(26.7)
74.2
(29.2)
83.1
67.8
(26.7)
71.6
(28.2)
77.5
(30.5)
85.6
71.1
(28.0)
73.7
(29.0)
78.7
(31.0)
85.6
72.9
(28.7)
74.9
(29.5)
79.2
(31.2)
86.4
73.7
(29.0)
75.4
(29.7)
79.2
(31.2)
85.1
73.7
(29.0)
75.4
(29.7)
80.0
(31.5)
85.1
72.4
(28.5)
73.7
(29.0)
78.7
72.39
41.9
(31.0)
(28.5)
(16.5)
85.1
85.1
80.0
55.1
56.4
(21.0
(20.0
(19.0
(18.7
(18.7
(20.0
(21.0
(21.5
(24.7
(26.2
(27.0
(28.5
(31.0
(32.7
(33.7
(33.7
(34.0
(33.5
(33.5
(33.5
(33.5
(31.5
(21.7
(22.2
1
r
fc
'^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest k, inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
I'
UBllMHSfiUXliliillLllli^^
i i
>
©
c •
03 +-)
I— C
Q.-.-
O
r— Q.
(O
+J CU
C O
O C
N O)
•r- i.
S- OJ
O 4-
J= OJ
S-
ro
-t->
o (c
u O)
5-
en >
c o
•I- -Q
Q. (O
to
(O (/I
s- <u
u
to c
— "r—
C
s-
cn
5 o «
•0 lO (g N
ii
I'
V-37
IlBllIMliliiMlilMfilillf^I
li
TABLE 10
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
101.6 CENTIMETERS (40 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE PROM THE SRV,*
See Eigure 12
V
Angle to
Left or Right
Percentiles
Minimum
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
39.4
37.3
35.6
28.4
(11.2)
33.5
29.7
(11.7)
33.5
30.5
(12.0)
31.0
(12.2)
34.8
31.0
(12.2)
31.8
(12.5)
38.1
31.8
(12.5)
33.5
(13.2)
41.1
33.0
(13.0)
35.6
(14.0)
45.0
34.8
(13.7)
39.4
(15.5)
49.5
38.6
(15.2)
43.2
(17.0)
53.8
43.2
(17.0)
48.3
(19.0)
58.4
47.5
(18.7)
53.3
(21.0)
62.2
53.3
(21.0)
57.7
(22.7)
66.5
58.9
(23.2)
62.7
(24.7)
70.4
61.5
(24.2)
64.8
(25.5)
71.1
63.5
(25.0)
66.0
(26.0)
71.1
63.5
(25.0)
66.5
(26.2)
71.6
65.3
(25.7)
67.8
(26.7)
72.4
66.5
(26.2)
72.9
68.6
42.4
45.0
15.5
14.7
14.0
13.2
13.2
13.7
15.0
16.2
17.7
19.5
21.2
23.0
24.5
26.2
27.7
28.0
28.0
28.2
28.5
28.7
27.0
16.7
17.7
54.6
50.8
48.8
47.0
46.2
46.2
47.5
50.8
54.6
59.7
62.2
65.3
72.4
77.5
80.0
79.2
80.0
80.0
80.5
80.0
78.7
74.2
60.2
59.7
(21
.5)
(20
.0)
(19
.2)
(18
.5)
(18
.2)
(18
.2)
(18
.7)
(20
.0)
(21
.5)
(23
.5)
(24
.5)
(25
.7)
(28
.5)
(30
.5)
(31
.5)
(31
.2)
(31
.5)
(31
.5)
(31
.7)
(31
.5)
(31.
0)
(29.
2)
(23.
7)
(23.
5)
1'
k
^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest ^ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
Y
V-38
liBllMMJiliiflliSIIMIIIIk
k I
OJ
c
•
03
-»->
r—
c
Q.
•r-
o
^—
Q.
IT3
4J
OJ
E
(J
o
c
tM
0)
•f—
s_
s-
a;
O M-
^
0)
s-
(D
+->
o
(O
4->
QJ
</)
.C
u
O)
<0
^
<u
+->
S-
cu
cn
>
c
o
•t-~
.£J
Q.
(O
</)
fO
(/)
s-
a;
cnx:
o
1/)
c
m.
r-
C
0)
z>
s: ^
f
t
r
o>
]i
I'
V-39
I 1 I I
lIlliLllllllilli
\ i
TABLE 11
MEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
114.3 CENTIMETERS (45 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE PROM THE SRV."
See Figure 13
¥
Angle to
Left or Right
Percentiles
Minimum
50
95
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
26.7
(10.5)
35.6
21.6
(8.5)
22.1
(8.7)
31.0
19.1
(7.5)
19.6
(7.7)
27.9
17.8
(7.0)
19.1
(7.5)
26.7
17.0
(6.7)
18.3
(7.2)
25.9
17.0
(6.7)
18.3
(7.2)
26.7
17.0
(6.7)
19.1
(7.5)
27.9
17.8
(7.0)
19.6
(7.7)
30.5
19.1
(7.5)
21.6
(8.5)
34.3
21.6
(8.5)
24.1
(9.5)
38.1
25.4
(10.0)
27.9
(11.0)
41.9
28.4
(11.2)
32.3
(12.7)
46.2
33.0
(13.0)
39.4
(15.5)
50.8
37.3
(14,7)
44.5
(17.5)
55.9
43.7
(17.2)
48.3
(19.0)
59.7
48.8
(19.2)
52.1
(20.5)
61.0
49.5
(19.5)
52.1
(20.5)
61.0
50.0
(19.7)
53.3
(21.0)
61.5
51.3
(20.2)
54.6
(21.5)
62.2
50.0
(19.7)
53.8
(21.2)
62.2
47.5
(18.7)
50.8
(20.0)
58.9
39.4
(15.5)
52.6
37.3
(14.7)
45.7
32.3
(12.7)
41.9
(14.0
(12.2
(11.0
(10.5
(10.2
(10.5
(11.0
(12.0
(13.5
(15.0
(16.5
(18.2
(20.0
(22.0
(23.5
(24.0
(24.0
(24.2
(24.5
(24.5
(23.2
(20.7
(18.0
(16.5
50.8
46.2
42.4
39.4
38.1
38.1
38.6
41.1
46.2
50.0
53.8
57.7
62.7
66.5
68.6
69.1
69.9
70.4
71.1
70.4
70.4
66.0
57.7
54.6
(20.0
(18.2
(16.7
(15.5
(15.0
(15.0
(15.2
(16.2
(18.2
(19.7
(21.2
(22.7
(24.7
(26.2
(27.0
(27.2
(27.5
(27.7
(28.0
(27.7
(27.7
(26.0
(22.7
(21.5
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data W' e measured to the nearest ki inch and are
reported here roundt, down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
f
i
Y
\
k
I'
V-40
lilllliililLlllllllLllL
n
o O Ift o
o f a> £ o
o
(0 \
K \
^ / * S
8 / / K ^
«N
V ^ \^
* "^r**»y / ^
o
\ lO^A/"^,..-
iic>cv/ °= o
lO
\g»^yvxnr~I.
K^
SSfes^XX / •"
o \
/C/'\<?^
//x^Ci -^^ *
^^ —
Hi
'^^JijuU^^
'^ K
f^r-^
1^7
vM
^___,^-' —
f-X^
rHjJS^'^
gs^a^
TTJ^^
'!«
"^il
o
^
~ •Y
^^
^
^6^^ -
«iiJK—
S^SA — -^
1 1
*S<i-i_i.
in
/^
>s25
P?0^\s
J ^
/ / /
\ \ \ >^ —
1 — E
y^
/ / \
\ \ \ > -J
Q.T-
■^
/ / I
\ \ \ o
o
o
/ / I
\ \ \ •«
1 — Q.
-J
^ / \
\ \ 1; ^
(T3
m
/
\ \ s
c o
«■
/ /
\ 0> lO
o c
_i
s. /
\ ° J
N a)
O O '
CM >
•1- S-
to 1ft lO — t
J N O o -J <n
S- OJ
O <4-
-" ^ 3 ©
i.
to
O (O
-l-> (1)
t'^
fO ^
= "-. » Vl^^..
O) +->
= o S o * ^**-
s-
. « rt t^* M « = >
-.^
OJ
"O 10 , 1
o
O) >
« *l
\nA
\
c o
•r- J3
_
TT 1
^
' K
,'■ '
CL to
o
/^
*">
* \
to
m
TV>v
>
y
(O to
J5T.S
(
X
s- <u
s
V
V
\
■>
/
in 1
Ol-C
in
N
\
\
\
1 •
o
lO
\^
Sfc.
\
k
1
to c
\
\
\
r
1
1
c
\ '
v^
V
1
O) LD
r
F^
r
s
■-
k
, V
h
s: ^
L
%
\
V
■
CO
■\:
^
"^
^
-W
)
4^*
^
3
C71
•r—
u.
:
,
m
1 '
s
(
9
1 i^
1
a-
"« «
♦ « e
> "l
o S -
n r
» .
M
M
f
1
y
k
I'
V-41
UllllUlilJi
MIMIIIIIIL
k i
Angle to
TABLE 12
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
THROUGH THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV.''-
See Figure 14
Percentiles
V-42
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Left or Right Minimum 5 50 95
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest \ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
t
I
55.9 (22.0)
41.1 (16.2) 55.1 (21.7) Y
35.6 (14.0) 44.5 (17.5) 56.4 (22.2)
38.6 (15.2) 47.5 (18.7) 58.4 (23.0)
41.1 (16.2) 48.3 (19.0) 60.2 (23.7)
42.4 (16.7) 49.5 (19.5) 60.2 (23.7)
40.6 (16.0) 48.3 (19.0) 58.4 (23.0)
38.6 (15.2) 46.2 (18.2) 55.9 (22.0) ' \
33.0 (13.0) 41.9 (16.5) 52.1 (20.5)
33.0 (13.0) 47.5 (18.7)
39.9 (15.7)
I'
IlIlIMUIifiiliililMlillllllk
I i
m
c
+->
•^
c
o
o
o.
N
•r-
(U
s~
u
o
c
xz
(U
S-
m
0)
M-
o
0)
4->
s-
JZ
+->
o
fO
(0
<u
<u
lO
i-
<u
oix:
c
+->
•^
Q.^
to
Ol
CO
3
i-
o
o>
S-
J=
to
■M
c
<U
0)
c
E
ra
o
t—
3
a.
Ll.
V
I'
Y
I
V-43
flllllMIlIlIfiMflillllL
i i
TABLE 13
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
15.2 CENTIMETERS (6 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV."
See Figure 15
Angle to
V-44
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Percentiles
Left or Right Minimum 5 50 95
26.7 (10.5)
29.2 (11.5)
36.8 (14.5)
40.6 (16.0)
45.7 (18.0)
50.8 (20.0)
50.8 (20.0) 57.2 (22.5) 67.3 (26.5)
53.3 (21.0) 58.4 (23.0) 69.9 (27.5)
54.6 (21.5) 60.2 (23.7) 71.1 (28.0)
58.9 (23.2) 63.5 (25.0) 71.1 (28.0)
60.2 (23.7) 63.5 (25.0) 72.4 (28.5)
60.2 (23.7) 64.0 (25.2) 72.4 (28.5)
58.9 (23.2) 63.5 (25.0) 70.4 (27.7)
55.9 (22.0) 61.0 (24.0) 66.5 (26.2)
52.6 (20.7) 58.4 (23.0) 64.8 (25.5)
50.8 (20.0) 61.0 (24.0)
41.1 (16.2) 53.3 (21.0)
r
I
'^Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest h, inch and are J__
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
IlllIMMiilliililMKIlIlIi-
I i
>
K
(A
©
<u
c
as
f—
O-
•
+J
r^
c
fO
•r—
+->
o
c
a.
o
N
cu
•r—
u
i~
c
o
0)
^
s-
O)
ro t-
O)
O
s-
-l->
+->
-C
to
o
OJ
nj
(/I
(U
s-
<u
JC
cn+J
c
•^
<u
Q.
>
</)
o
la ^
$-
(O
o>
(/>
in
<u
^
x:
c
o
(U
c
f
VO
O)
t
r
V-45
]IlllXlIlI]tS]l][I£1112L
1 1
Angle to
TABLE 14
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
30.5 CENTIMETERS (12 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT,
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE PROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 16
Percentiles
V-46
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Left or Right Minimum 5 50 95_
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest ^ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
t
32.3 (12.7)
35.6 (14.0)
27.9 (11.0) 39.4 (15.5)
33.0 (13.0) 44.5 (17.5)
31.0 (12.2) 38.1 (15.0) 50.8 (20.0) 1
36.8 (14.5) 45.0 (17.7) 54.6 (21.5)
41.9 (16.5) 50.8 (20.0) 57.7 (22.7)
48.3 (19.0) 55.1 (21.7) 62.2 (24.5)
54.6 (21.5) 59.7 (23.5) 66.0 (26.0)
58.4 (23.0) 63.5 (25.0) 71.1 (28.0)
61.0 (24.0) 66.0 (26.0) 74.2 (29.2) ]•
64.8 (25.5) 69.1 (27.2) 76.2 (30.0)
67.3 (26.5) 71.6 (28.2) 78.0 (30.7)
67.8 (26.7) 71.6 (28.2) 78.7 (31.0)
69.1 (27.2) 72.4 (28.5) 78.7 (31.0)
67.3 (26.5) 72.4 (28.5) 78.7 (31.0)
69.9 (27.5) 74.9 (29.5) " \
64.8 (25.5) 71.6 (28.2)
48.3 (19.0) 63.5 (25.0)
57.2 (22.5)
Y
UIllMMMlMMilfiMfiAIII^i
I i
V
>
(0
©
(U
c
fO
CL-M
c
^—
•^
(O
o
+J
Q.
c
o
<U
NJ
U
•r—
c
S-
0)
o
s-
JZ
0)
It-
(0
0)
s-
o
+->
-(->
re
^
<u
o
to
(O
(U
<u
t-
£
4->
ai
c
0)
•r-
>
Q. O
to
XI
(O
re
s-
o>
10
0)
V)
x:
*
o
c
c
(1)
•^
I'
1'
o c\j
0)
C31
k
I'
V-47
UIlfilMSIIlfilM
I I I I I I
I i
TABLE 15
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
45 CENTIMETERS (18 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE "FROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 17
Angle to
Left or Right
Minimum
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Percentiles
50
95
35.6
(14.0)
27.9
(11.0)
39.4
(15.5)
26.7
(10.5)
33.0
(13.0)
43.7
(17.2)
29.7
(11.7)
38.1
(15.0)
50.0
(19.7)
35.6
(14.0)
45.0
(17.7)
53.3
(21.0)
42.4
(16,7)
50.0
(19.7)
58.4
(23.0)
47.5
(18.7)
54.6
(21.5)
61.5
(24.2)
50.8
(20.0)
58.4
(23.0)
66.0
(26.0)
57.2
(22.5)
62.7
(24.7)
69.9
(27.5)
61.5
(24.2)
66.5
(26.2)
74.9
(29.5)
64.8
(25.5)
69.9
(27.5)
76.7
(30.2)
67.8
(26.7)
72.9
(28.7)
78.7
(31.0)
70.4
(27.7)
74.9
(29.5)
81.3
(32.0)
70.4
(27.7)
75.4
(29.7)
81.3
(32.0)
71.1
(28.0)
76.2
(30.0)
80.5
(31.7)
69.9
(27.5)
76.7
(30.2)
81.8
(32.2)
72.9
(28.7)
78.7
71.6
38.1
(31.0)
(28.2)
(15.0)
f
t
y
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest \ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
Y
V-U8
Ullliiilikllllllllli
¥
>
©
0)
c:
(O
^—
•
Q.-t->
c
r—
•r-
fO
o
+->
Q.
c
o
<D
N
O
•^
c
s-
0)
o
s-
^
O)
>+-
(O
cu
s_
o
4-)
-M
(O
x:
(U
o
CO
<o
0)
0)
1-
^
4->
CT
c
OJ
»r—
>
Q. O
t/1
J3
(O
re
s-
D1 </l
<u
V)
^
—
o
c
c
(U
•r-
f
r
O 00
0)
Cr>
\
I'
V-49
11 I 1 I
MlKMMltfiii&fillliL
n
TABLE 16
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
61 CENTIMETERS (24 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV."
See Figure 18
Angle to
Left or Right
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
45
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Percentiles
Minimum
50
22.9
22.9
27.2
25.4
20.3
(8.0)
31.0
25.4
(10.0)
37.3
29.2
(11.5)
40.6
36.1
(14.2)
47.0
43.2
(17.0)
50.8
48.3
(19.0)
55.1
52.1
(20.5)
58.4
55.9
(22.0)
63.5
59.7
(23.5)
66.5
63.5
(25.0)
69.9
66.5
(26.2)
72.4
67.8
(26.7)
74.2
68.6
(27.0)
76.2
69.9
(27.5)
77.5
69.1
(27.2)
76.7
33.0
(13.0)
72.4
27.9
(11.0)
35.6
22.9
(9.0)
30.5
20.8
(8.2)
28.4
27.9
(9.0
(9.0
(10.7
(10.0
(12.2
(14.7
(16.0
(18.5
(20.0
(21.7
(23.0
(25.0
(26.2
(27.5
(28.5
(29.2
(30.0
(30.5
(30.2
(28.5
(14.0
(12.0
(11.2
(11.0
95
38.1
40.6
35.6
42.4
48.3
45.0
53.3
54.6
59.7
62.7
66.0
71.1
74.9
76.7
78.7
81.3
81.3
81.3
81.8
78.7
68.6
55.9
45.7
40.6
(15.0
(16.0
(14.0
(16.7
(19.0
(17.7
(21.0
(21.5
(23.5
(24.7
(26.0
(28.0
(29.5
(30.2
(31.0
(32.0
(32.0
(32.0
(32.2
(31.0
(27.0
(22.0
(18.0
(16.0
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest k, inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
f
V
I
Y
■50
IlIllMMlifiMllMfil^IIllI
o
o
V
>
K
©
(U
c
(O
t—~
•
CL-t->
c
r—
•r-
ro
o
+->
Q.
c
o
0)
N
O
■r-
c
i.
<D
o
S~
j::
d)
<+-
ro
cu
s-
O
■!->
-l->
(O
^
(U
u
10
ra
<u
<u
s_ -c
+->
en
c
QJ
•r-
>
Q.
o
(/I
J3
ro
(O
S-
cn
1/1
(U
(/)
x:
_
o
c
c
aj
•r—
E
o ^
3
C\J
fc'
Y
oo
D>
k
I'
V-51
llIIIMMMIMMfilMiillfilli
1 1
TABLE 17
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
76.2 CENTIMETERS (30 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE PROM THE SRV,*
See Eigure 19
Angle to
Left or Right Mini
Percentiles
mum
5
50
95
L
165
18.3
(7.2)
31.8
(12.5)
48.8
(19.2)
L
150
15.7
(6.2)
30.5
(12.0)
41.9
(16.5)
L
135
17.0
(6.7)
22.1
(8.7)
38.6
(15.2)
L
120
17.8
(7.0)
27.2
(10.7)
43.2
(17.0)
L
105
16.5
(6.5)
30.5
(12.0)
45.7
(18.0)
L
90
22.1
(8.7)
33.0
(13.0)
43.7
(17.2)
L
75
25.4
(10.0)
39.4
(15.5)
50.8
(20.0)
L
60
33.0
(13.0)
44.5
(17.5)
53.3
(21.0)
L
45
38.1
(15.0)
48.3
(19.0)
55.9
(22.0)
L
30
43.2
(17.0)
52.1
(20.5)
61.5
(24.2)
L
15
46.2
(18.2)
55.9
(22.0)
64.0
(25.2)
50.8
(20.0)
58.4
(23.0)
68.6
(27.0)
R
15
54.6
(21.5)
62.2
(24.5)
71.6
(28.2)
R
30
57.2
(22.5)
65.3
(25.7)
73.7
(29.0)
R
45
58.9
(23.2)
69.9
(27.5)
75.4
(29.7)
R
60
62.2
(24.5)
70.4
(27.7)
77.5
(30.5)
R
75
64.0
(25.2)
72.4
(28.5)
76.7
(30.2)
R
90
65.3
(25.7)
72.9
(28.7)
78.7
(31.0)
R
105
66.0
(26.0)
73.7
(29.0)
78.7
(31.0)
R
120
41.1
(16.2)
66.5
(26.2)
74.9
(29.5)
R
135
32.3
(12.7)
49.5
(19.5)
69.9
(27.5)
R
150
27.9
(11.0)
41.1
(16.2)
59.7
(23.5)
R
165
26.7
(10.5)
39.4
(15.5)
55.9
(22.0)
180
24.1
(9.5)
38.1
(15.0)
50.8
(20.0)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest \ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
I
t
1'
fc
Y
V-52
UIIIIMMIMMMIIIIMIIII;
V
>
vc
©
<u
c
(O
r—
•
Q.4->
c
^—
•r-
re
o
+->
Q-
c
o
OJ
IM
O
•r—
c
S-
ai
o
s-
x:
(U
M-
re
Ol
s-
o
4->
4J
re
.E
<u
O
t/)
re
<u
0)
J- x:
+j
CT
C
OJ
•1—
>
Q.
o
(/) .^
re
re
j-
D> Irt
<a
t/i x:
.
o
c
c
<u
•r-
o o
3
ro
CD
t
y
k
i^
V-53
llIIKMUliliiJilifikttiillli
1 1
TABLE 18
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
91.4 CENTIMETERS (36 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE FROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 20
Angle to
Left or Right
L
165
L
150
L
135
L
120
L
105
L
90
L
75
L
60
L
A5
L
30
L
15
R
15
R
30
R
45
R
60
R
75
R
90
R
105
R
120
R
135
R
150
R
165
180
Percentiles
Minimum
50
95
22.9
(9.0'
) 33.0
20.3
(8.o:
) 29.2
18.3
(7.2:
) 25.9
18.3
(7.2:
) 25.4
18.3
(7.2:
) 26.7
19.6
(7.7;
) 29.2
20.8
(8.2:
) 33.0
25.4 <
'lo.o;
I 36.1
29.2 (
:ii.5;
) 39.4
33.5 (
'13. 2:
) 43.7
36.1 (
:i4.2'
> 48.3
41.1 (
'16.2'
) 52.1
44.5 (
:i7.5:
) 54.6
47.0 (
:i8.5:
) 57.2
48.8 (
:i9.2'
) 61.0
52.6 (
:2o.7:
) 63.5
53.3 (
:2i.o'
) 64.8
56.4 (
:22.2:
) 66.5
53.8 (
:2i.2
) 66.5
46.2 (
:i8.2"
) 63.5
31.8 <
;i2.5
) 48.3
25.4 (
:io.o
) 43.7
25.9 (
:io.2
) 40.6
24.1
(9.5
) 38.6
(13.0
(11.5
(10.2
(10.0
(10.5
(11.5
(13.0
(14.2
(15.5
(17.2
(19.0
(20.5
(21.5
(22.5
(24.0
(25.0
(25.5
(26.2
(26.2
(25.0
(19.0
(17.2
(16.0
(15.2
49.5
45.0
40.6
39.4
38.6
40.6
43.7
45.7
49.5
54.6
57.7
61.0
62.7
66.0
68.6
70.4
71.1
72.9
72.9
70.4
65.3
59.7
55.9
53.8
(19.5
(17.7
(16.0
(15.5
(15.2
(16.0
(17.2
(18.0
(19.5
(21.5
(22.7
(24.0
(24.7
(26.0
(27.0
(27.7
(28.0
(28.7
(28.7
(27.7
(25.7
(23.5
(22.0
(21.2
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest \ inch and are
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an inch.
t
\
I'
V-54
11 1
lIIMMSJillMIi^iAlIiilk
I i
- o ■*
. W ro <vj
<u
c
ro
^—
•
a.4J
c
^—
•r—
m
o
+j
Q.
c
o
OJ
NJ
O
'f
c
s-
(U
o
s~
.c
(U
4-
(O
0)
s-
o
4J
-M
ro
-C
OJ
o
W)
ro
Q)
(U
S-
x:
4J
C71
C
0)
•r—
>
Q.
o
10
.12
ro
ro
1-
cn
to
O)
(/)
.x:
.
o
c
c
<u
•r-
E
O U3
3 ro
.
o
CM
(U
i.
t
r
C7)
b
I'
V-55
]lllIMHM£lil]ilIIIllIlL
TABLE 19
WOMEN'S RIGHT HAND GRASPING REACH TO A HORIZONTAL PLANE
106.7 CENTIMETERS (42 in.) ABOVE THE SEAT REFERENCE POINT.
HORIZONTAL DISTANCE PROM THE SRV.*
See Figure 21
I I
Angle to
Left or Right Mini
Perce
ntiles
mum
5
50
95
L
165
12.7
(5.0)
25.9
(10.2)
43.2
(17.0)
L
150
10.7
(4.2)
22.9
(9.0)
38.1
(15.0)
L
135
9.4
(3.7)
21.6
(8.5)
34.8
(13.7)
L
120
8.9
(3.5)
20.3
(8.0)
33.0
(13.0)
L
105
8.1
(3.2)
20.3
(8.0)
31.8
(12.5)
L
90
8.9
(3.5)
20.3
(8.0)
33.0 (
(13.0)
L
75
9.4
(3.7)
22.1
(8.7)
36.8
(14.5)
L
60
10.2
(4.0)
24.1
(9.5)
41.1 (
:i6.2)
L
45
11.9
(4.7)
26.7
[10.5)
40.6 (
;i6.o)
L
30
14.0
(5.5)
29.2
U1.5)
43.2 <
:i7.0)
L
15
16.5
(6.5)
31.8
:i2.5)
45.0 (
:i7.7)
19.1
(7.5)
35.6
:i4.0)
47.0 (
(18.5)
R
15
22.9
(9.0)
40.6 (
:i6.0)
48.3 (
:i9.o)
R
30
25.4
(10.0)
43.2 <
:i7.o)
52.1 (
'20.5)
R
45
28.4
(11.2)
44.5 (
:i7.5)
55.9 (
:22.0)
R
60
30.5
(12.0)
48.3 (
:i9.o)
57.2 (
22.5)
R
75
33.0
(13.0)
50.8 <
:2o.o)
59.7 (
23.5)
R
90
35.6
(14.0)
50.8 (
:2o.o)
61.0 (
24.0)
R
105
35.6
(14.0)
52.1 (
20.5)
61.0 (
24.0)
R
120
30.5
(12.0)
47.0 (
:i8.5)
59.7 (
23.5)
R
135
23.4
(9.2)
39.4 (
15.5)
53.8 (
21.2)
R
150
19.1
(7.5)
35.6 (
14.0)
50.0 (
19.7)
R
165
16.5
(6.5)
31.0 (
12.2)
48.3 (
19.0)
180
14.0
(5.5)
27.9 (
11.0)
47.5 (
18.7)
*Data given in centimeters with inches in parentheses.
The original data were measured to the nearest ^ inch
reported here rounded down to the nearest tenth of an
and are
inch.
r
1
I'
¥
V-56
li 1 1 1
ILlli^LlllilllllL
«o lo (vj 2
(U
c
(0
1 —
•
Q.4J
c
r—
• r—
(D
O
-l->
CL
C
o
<u
N
u
•f—
c
s_
OJ
o
s-
^
aj
<4-
ea
OJ
S-
o
4J
+J
(O
x:
0)
o
</l
(O
O)
0)
s- x:
-M
en
c:
(U
• r—
>
Q. O
1/1
J3
(O
la
s-
cn
t/)
OJ
to
x:
—
<j
c
c
(U
E
o cvj
3
**
t
s-
t
r
k
I'
V-57
li I I II
KIlMJiiillftiLI
I I L
When backrest angles are changed, however, there will be correspond-
ing changes in the functional reaches attainable — assuming other factors
remain constant. As the angle of the backrest increases from 103° the should-
ers will move rearward, and forward reach distances will be correspondingly
reduced; as the backrest assumes a more vertical position, forward reaches
will be increased. Both Ely, Thomson and Orlansky (1963) and Bullock (1974) ..
have dealt with the question of changes in reach as a function of changes ^
in backrest angle. Data from the first of these reports indicate that a
change in backrest angle from 103 to the vertical (or 90 ) results in
an increase in directly forward functional reach of about 5 inches (12.7
cm.), or approximately 0.4 inches (1.0 cm.) for each one degree of backrest
change. This holds for the area at shoulder height to about 11 inches (27.9
cm.) below this level. This study did not report data for reaches other
than straight ahead.
f
The Bullock study did investigate changes in other angular reaches ■
as a function of changes in backrest angle. Here, it was reported that
at a level of 14 inches (35.6 cm.) above the SRP , reaches to the side,
or 90 ° from the midline, were affected least. Differences in reach with
backrest change were maximal in the area around 15 from the right of the
midline, thereafter decreasing to both the right and left. Changes with
a decrease in backrest angle (towards the vertical) were not determined
by Bullock, but extrapolation from the above data indicates that, with
a vertical backrest, maximal functional forward reaches vrould be increased
above those taken at 103° by about 5.0 inches (12.7 cm.) in reaches made
directly to the front, a value that agrees with that of Ely et al . Combin-
ing the results of the two studies, we show in Table 20, the increments
or decrements, in functional arm reaches that would be expected to result
from each one degree of change in backrest angle from the 103 conditions
under which the date in Tables 2-19 were obtained. As an example, a change
in backrest from 103° to 90° (vertical) , would increase 45° angular reach
by 13 X 0.37 inches or 4.8 inches (12.2 cm.). It should be noted that these
correction factors are expected to be reasonably accurate except for reaches V
to the highest levels, where the increments will become smaller, with the
least change for reach directly overhead.
When shoulders are not kept in contact with the backrest, differences
are difficult to quantify because of the great variability in arm reaches
afforded by free body movement and by the variability of restrictions caused
by different clothing and equipment assemblies. Basic functional reach
data are those that are taken under conditions of torso restraints, as _
in the present Tables 2-19. Here, with the use of the factors in Table J^
20, corrections may be made to convert the data to vertical backrest condi-
tions--which is the equivalent of defining the arm reach from a vertical
plane in back of the shoulder, a useful concept. For example, adding approxi-
mately 5 inches (12.7 cm.) to any 0° degree arm reach in Tables 2-19 will
give a back-of-the-shoulder-to-finger-grasp reach dimension.
In any event, the practical problems suggested by such differences
in backrest angle and body movement clearly indicate the need for further,
definitive studies to more accurately determine the best means of transform-
V-58
t
I'
UlifiMHIIJililiMMM&illi^^
ing existing data in such a way that they will have applicability under dif-
fering kinds of conditions.
Zero-G Conditions - Unrest rained or Partially Restrained Body Movement
Another consideration in utilizing the present arm reach data relates
to the changes in working conditions in a zero-g environment, where we are
normally dealing with the operator in a neutral body position. Here the body
may be either totally unrestrained, or partially restrained — in the latter
case probably by means of a foot restraint system.
When the body is totally unrestrained, or "free-floating", problems of
design layout relative to functional reach would appear to be minimal. With
no restraints on body movement, anyone, regardless of body size or related
functional reach, should be able to reach to virtually any physically
accessible location in or around the workspace with a minimum of difficulty.
With the body restrained or anchored at the feet, zero-g experience in
Skylab has led to the observation that for body size in general and arm reach
in particular "...the (design) limitations of work stations to 38 inches
(96.5 cm.) width. . .and the use of foot restraints that can be positioned to
any height will provide for all possible sizes of 5th to 95th per-
centile populations" (Thompson, 1975). It is quite true that the ability to
position the feet of the operator at any of a variety of positions for body
restraint in a zero-g environment lends a dimension of adjustability to the
workspace that is not normally found under terrestrial conditions. As a
consequence, the much greater flexibility that is afforded for body
positioning makes the layout of workspaces and controls on the basis of func-
tional arm reaches considerably easier under zero-g conditions. Deficiencies
in arm reach resulting from even markedly smaller body size can be compen-
sated for by the simple expedient of moving the foot restraint position up or
down, in or out.
In addition, as a result of zero-g experience in Skylab, it has been
stated that the neutral body posture at console stations enables a crewman to
"reach approximately 0.4 meter (15.7 inches) beyond his normal seated reach"
(Johnson, 1975). Granted that this is an approximation, and that this value
would not necessarily apply equally to all reach positions within a
workspace, it nevertheless gives a clear indication of the very substantial
increases in functional reach that can be expected as part of the normal
zero-g working conditions. Adding 15.7 inches (39.9 cm.), or even somewhat
less to allow for a "safety factor", to the reach dimensions in Tables 2-19,
will greatly simplify the task of providing workspace and control
accessibility in Space Shuttle-Spacelab, especially in conjunction with the
greatly expanded reach capability afforded by body repositioning through ad-
justable foot restraint positions.
For these reasons, it would seem that workspace layout and control V
locations for weightlessness operations should present relatively few prob-
V-59
UilililliUllllllllli
I
i i
lems to the designer. Nevertheless, there may be occasions in which it
is necessary to estimate certain reach dimensions with the body in a fixed
position. Here the data in Tables 2-19 may again be used. The first correc-
tion, as before, should be to change the data from a 103° backrest to a
vertical one; reach dimensions can then be assumed to start, functionally,
from the back of the shoulder (instead of from the seat reference vertical *■
SRV) . Specific examples are as follows: From Table 20 the appropriate
increments can be added to accomplish this purpose, i.e., 5.2 inches (13.2
cm.) to the tabular data for direct forward reach (13° x O.AO); 6.5 inches
(16.5 cm.) at 15° ; 5.8 inches (14.7 cm.) at 30°; 4.8 inches (12.2 cm.)
at 45° ; 3.3 inches (8.4 cm.) at 60°; 1.8 inches (4.6 cm.) at 75°; and 1.3
inches (3.3 cm.) -at 90°. Thus, if a fixed position of the shoulder is assumed,
functional reaches can be estimated on the above basis.
Shoulder position will, of course, be dependent in large part upon I
the locations of the various foot rest surfaces, and the "stature" of the \
individual in the neutral body position, to which must be added perhaps \
one to one and one half inches for the shoe restraint suction-cup system.
t
Conversion Techniques for Different Populations
The functional arm reach measurements presented in Tables 2-19 were
taken on healthy, young, adult, U.S. males and females selected to be anthro-
pometrically representative of U.S. Air Force populations. As such they
may be assumed to have certain similarities, and some differences, with
the intended Space Shuttle-Spacelab populations. Air Force flying personnel
and spaceflight groups may be assumed, physically and in terms of body
size, to have much in common. First of all they must both be healthy and
in good physical condition. Here the requirements for spaceflight crews
will, if anything, be more rigid than those for the military generally.
In terms of age, the space crews may be more mature, but are not likely \r
to be elderly. They will both be somewhat above average socio-economically
and educationally, with the space crews probably markedly higher in the
latter category.
All these characteristics tend to be associated positively with
larger body size. Spaceflight crews therefore, would be expected on this
basis to be at least as large, or possibly larger, than U.S. Air Force
flying personnel. Sex differences in body size are also important since
both men and women will be represented in the project, but reach data are ' t
available separately on both sexes.
The major population differences that will need to be taken into
account are those related to nationality and secular change. Ethnic or
national differences in body size will be important since not only U.S.
personnel will be manning the Spacelab, but probably some Europeans, and
perhaps Asiatics, as well. Secondly, since Space Shuttle-Spacelab operations
are planned through 1980-1990, and since we know that there is some apparent-
ly continuing increase in body size over time, we can anticipate, all other \^
things being equal, a slightly larger spacecraft population in the future.
V-60
liSIliilififilMiillliilLllllK;
TABLE 20
APPROXIMATE CHANGES IN ARM REACHES IN TABLES 2-19
AS A FUNCTION OF VARIATION IN SEAT BACKREST ANGLE*
I I
Direction of arm reach
(from 0° or "straight ahead,"
to 90° to the right )
0^
15^
Approximate changes in reach for
each single degree of change in back-
rest angle (reach increases as backrest
angle moves to vertical, and vice versa)
+ 1.02 cm. (+ 0.40 in.)
+ 1.27 cm. (+ 0.50 in.)
30
+ 1.14 cm. (+ 0.45 in.)
45^
+ 0.94 cm. (+ 0.37 in.)
60^
+ 0.66 cm. (+ 0.26 in.)
75
+ 0.36 cm. (+ 0.14 in.)
90
+ 0.25 cm. (+ 0.10 in.)
*Derived from Ely et al. (1963) and Bullock (1974).
V-61
I
Y
]i I 1 11
UMMJiMllIlii
a I I I I i
i i
With regard to the latter consideration, it should be pointed out
that both the male and female populations for which the arm reach data
are presented are above average in body size. They are, in fact, very close
to the projected 1980 statures for males and females, and functional reach
tends to be highly correlated with stature. Specifically, mean stature
of present arm reach males is 69.6 inches (176.8 cm.); projected 1980 mean
male stature is 69.5 inches (176.5 cm.). Mean stature of arm reach females I
is 64.1 inches (162.8 cm.); projected 1980 mean female stature is 64.2
inches (163.1 cm.). In other words, the secular increase in body size need
not be taken into account in planning for functional arm reaches of Space
Shuttle-Spacelab populations through 1980. For projections for 1990, a
further stature increase for males of 0.5 inches (1.3 cm.), and 0.4 inches
(1.0 cm.) for females might be postulated, though this is an upper, outside,
estimate. Due to the apparent slowing of secular "growth" recently noted
for the population from which U.S. astronauts come, any such increase over
that 10 year period, would likely be less than those values with rather |
minimal effects on functional arm reach.
Ethnic, or national, differences in body size, and therefore in
functional arm reach, on the other hand, can be of considerable importance.
In general. Northwest Europeans will be fairly similar in body size to
our United States populations, Southern or Eastern Europeans somewhat
smaller, and Asiatics, especially Southeastern Asiatics, the smallest of all.
Since the major area of concern relative to functional arm reach is almost
always that of the smallest person with the shortest reaches, attention .t
should be directed to the smallest persons likely to be utilizing Spacelab
work areas. The 5th percentile Asiatic female would appear to be the most
likely candidate, although it should be remembered that personnel selection
on the basis of body size, could be employed to establish any desired lower
limits of body size.
The present female arm reach data in Tables 12-19 are based on a
U.S. population, and the 5th percentile values will therefore be somewhat
larger than the corresponding 5th percentile reaches of Asiatic females. J
Unfortunately, anthropometric data on Southeast Asiatic females comparable
to that on U.S. females are not available. Such data on males are avail-
able, however, and comparisons between South Vietnamese military groups
(one of the very smallest world populations in terms of body size) show
that in terms of stature and related body measurements, 5th percentile
Vietnamese military personnel have values about 907o of those of 5th percen-
tile U.S. Air Force flying personnel. Comparable percentages for anatomic
arm lengths is about 93-947o. Presumably, the corresponding relationships _ _
between 5th percentile female Vietnamese and 5th percentile U.S. females ^
would not be too different.
While it is true that functional reach dimensions are not determined
solely by static body dimensions, there is nevertheless a strong positive
correlation between the two types of measurements (Stoudt, 1973), and
it is not unreasonable therefore to assume the same kind of percentage
relationship relative to 5th percentile functional reaches. If this is
done, the use of a 90% factor applied to the 5th percentile female data «/
V-62
niillLlLllLilLlllllllll'L
in Tables 12-19 should provide a conservative estimate of the 5th percentile
functional reach of a very small Asiatic female population. This would be the
lower limit of functional reaches to be accommodated.
V
Leg Reach Data and Its Applications ""
As compared to the relatively voluminous data available on functional
arm reaches from a variety of studies, leg reach data may be said to be mini-
mal. There is, in fact, not one study dealing with leg reaches that has been
carried out in the detailed manner of any of the more comprehensive arm reach
studies. The single best available study is that of Laubach and Alexander
(n.d.), as yet unpublished. Measurements were taken of knee heights and heel
point positions in both favored or "comfortable", and maximally extended F
leg positions.
However, neither these nor any other leg reach data would seem to have
any special applicability to Spacelab conditions. Neither the zero-g
condition, nor the neutral body position, unrestrained or partially
restrained, would appear to be particularly appropriate for the use of foot
controls, especially if some type of foot or shoe restraint system is
employed. It is true that the Space Shuttle pilot and co-pilot locations
might require foot controls similar to those in present day aircraft, but 'i'
here existing design specifications should be adequate since (presumably) the
personnel would be similar in body size and leg reach to U.S. Air Force
flying personnel. It is only in Spacelab, with its potentially wide range of
body size variability, e.g., 95th percentile U.S. male to 5th percentile Asi-
atic female, that design problem of leg reach accommodation might have been
expected to occur.
It is not, therefore, considered advisable to make recommendations _,
relative to functional leg reaches in Skylab for the following reasons: (1) \
first and most importantly, the lack of any adequate body of anthropometric
data defining functional leg reaches for male and female populations; (2) the
difficulties of using foot controls in a zero-g environment, especially with
a foot restraint, shoe suction-cup system; and (3) finally, the lack of any
apparent clear-cut need for foot controls in the Spacelab working
environment .
V-63
li
I'
liflliljiilMliliSMlillili;.
I i
REFERENCES
Anonymous 1975. "Space Shuttle," Survival and Flight Equipment J . ,
5(1):6-16.
Bullock, Margaret I. 1974. "The Determination of Functional Arm Reach
Boundaries for Operation of Manual Controls," Ergonomics , X'
17(3):375-388.
Clauser, Charles E. , Pearl E. Tucker, John T. McConville, et al . 1972.
Anthropometry of Air Force Women. AMRL-TR-70-5, Aerospace Medical
Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Damon, Albert, Howard W. Stoudt, and Ross A. McFarland 1963. "Control
Layout," Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design , C. T.
Morgan, J. T. Cook III, A. Chapanis, and M. W. Lund, eds . , McGraw- F
Hill (New York), pp. 307-312.
Damon, Albert, Howard W. Stoudt, and Ross A. McFarland 1966. The Human
Body in Equipment Design , Harvard University Press (Cambridge,
Mass . ) .
Dempster, Wilfred Taylor 1955. Space Requirements of the Seated Opera -
tor . WADC-TR-55-159, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. '||
Dempster, W. T., W. C. Gabel, and W. J. L. Felts 1959. "The
Anthropometry of the Manual Work Space for the Seated Subject,"
Amer. J. of Phys . Anthrop ., 17:289-317.
Ely, Jerome H. , Robert M. Thomson, and Jesse Orlansky 1963. "Layout of
Workplaces," Human Engineering Guide to Equipment Design , C. T.
Morgan, J. T. Cook III, A. Chapanis, and M. W. Lund, eds., McGraw- 1^
Hill (New York), ch . 7, pp. 281-320. 1
Garrett, J. W. , M. Alexander, and C. W. Matthews 1970. Placement of
Aircraft Controls (Human Factors Tests to Determine Effects of
Aircraft Controls Placement on Lightly Clothed or Pressure Suited
Flight Crews). AMRL-TR-70-33, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio.
Hammond, David C, and Ronald W. Roe 1972. SAE Controls Reach Study.
Paper 721099, SAE Transactions , vol. 81, sec. 2, pp. 765-785.
Hertzberg, H. T. E. , G. S. Daniels, and Edmund Churchill 1954.
Anthropometry of Flying Personnel - 1950 . WADC-TR-52-321 , Wright
Air Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Johnson, C. C. 1975. Skylab Experiment M487 Habitability/Crew Quarters .
NASA TM-X-58163.
V-64
b
I'
lillllMSIMMMSililllllL
i i
Kennedy, Kenneth W. 1964. Reach Capability of the USAF Population,
Phase I, The Outer Boundaries of Grasping Reach Envelopes for the
Shirt-Sleeved, Seated Operator . AMRL-TDR-64-59, Aerospace Medical
Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
King, B. G. 1948. "Measurements of Man for Making Machinery," Amer. J.
of Phys . Anthrop ., 6:341-351.
King, B. G., D. J. Morrow, and E. P. Vollmer 1947. Cockpit Studies -
The Boundaries of the Maximum Area for the Operation of Manual
Controls^ Report 3, Project X-651, National Naval Medical Center,
Bethesda, Md.
Laubach, Lloyd. L., and Milton Alexander 1975. "Arm Reach Capability of
USAF Pilots as Affected by Personal Protective Equipment,"
Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine , 46(4) :377-386.
Lenda,J. A., A. A. Rosener, and M. L. Stephenson 1972. Neutral Buoyancy
Testing of Architectural and Environmental Concepts of Space
Vehicle Design . NASA CR- 11 5640.
McCormick, Ernest J. 1970. Human Factors Engineering (3rd edition),
McGraw-Hill (New York).
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1976. Space Shuttle .
NASA SP-407.
Parker, James F., Jr., and Vita R. West, eds . , 1973. Bioastronautics
Data Book (2nd edition). NASA SP-3006.
Randall, Francis E., Albert Damon, Robert S. Benton, and Donald I. Patt
1946. Human Body Size in Military Aircraft and Personal
Equipment^ AAF-TR-5501, Army Air Force, Wright Field, Dayton,
Olio.
Rebiffe, Par R., 0. Zayana, and C. Terriere 1969. "Determination des
Zones Optimales pour L' Emplacement des Commandes Manuelles dan
L'Espace de Travail," Ergonomics , 12(6):913-924.
Roebuck, J. A., Jr., K. H. E. Kroemer, and W. G. Thomson 1975. Engineer -
ing Anthropometry Methods . John Wiley & Sons (New York), pp. 77-
107.
Stoudt , H. W. 1973. "Arm Lengths and Arm Reaches: Some Interrelation-
ships of Structural and Functional Body Dimensions," Amer. J. of
Phys. Anthrop ., 38:151-162.
Stoudt, H. W., T. J. Crowley, R. A. McFarland, A. Ryan, et al. 1970.
Static and Dynamic Measurements of Motor Vehicle Drivers . FH-11-
6569, National Highway Safety Bureau, Washington, D.C.
V-65
t
\
¥
UillilllilM^iillMIAIilf
I
n
Thompson, A. B. 1975. "Habitability Design in Europe's Spacelab - A
Status Report," AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 154 on Current
Status in Aerospace Medicine , Walton L. Jones, ed. , AGARD-CP-154,
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NeuilLy sur Seine, France,
pp. C2-1 to C2-7.
U.S. Air Force Systems Command 1972. "Human Engineering," Design i
Handbook, DH 1-3, Personnel Subsystems , Wright-Patterson Air Force ^
Base, Ohio.
VanCott, Harold P., and Robert G. Kinkade, eds., 1972. Human Engineer-
ing Guide to Equipment Design (revised edition), American
Institute for Research (Washington, D.C.).
White, R. M., and E. Churchill 1971. The Body Size of Soldiers: U.S.
Army Anthropometry - 1966 . TR-72-51-CE, U.S. Army Natick Labora- c
tones, Natick, Mass. '
Wooclson, W. E., et al. 1971. Driver Eye Position and Control Reach
Anthropometrics. I, Static Eye Position, Control Reach and Con-
trol Force Studies . Report MFI 71-117, Man Factors Inc., San
Diego, Calif.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories 1975. AMRL Data Book (Metric
Units) . Final Report F 33615-75-C-5003, Wright-Patterson Air
Force Base, Ohio.
Department of Defense 1974. Military Standard - Human Engineering
Design Criteria for Military Systems, Equipment, and Facilities .
MIL-STD-1472B, Washington, D.C.
Faulkner, T. W. , and R. A. Day 1976. "Maximum Functional Reach for the
Female Operator," American Institute of Industrial Engineering
Transactions , 2(2) :126-13l.
Garrett, John W. , and Kenneth W. Kennedy 1971. A Collation of Anthropo-
metry . AMRL-TR-68-1, Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories ,
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Hertzberg, H. T. E. 1972. "Engineering Anthropology," Human Engineering " \
Guide to Equipment Design (revised edition), Harold P. Van Cott
and Robert G. Kincade, eds., American Institute for Research
(Washington, D.C), pp. 467-484.
Jones, Walton L. 1975. "A Summary of Sky lab Findings of Interest to
Life Scientists," AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 154 on Current
Status in Aerospace Medicine , Walton L. Jones, ed. , AGARD-CP-154,
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Neuilly sur Seine, France, ,,
pp. C3-1 to C3-16. L
V-66
1'
Uiliii^liUlllllllll
i i
Kennedy, K. W. , and B. E. Filler 1966, Aperture Sizes and Depths of
Reach for One- and Two-Handed Task'st AMRL-TR-66-27 , Aerospace
Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base,
Ohio.
Marton, T,, F. D. Rudek, R. A. Miller, and D. G. Norman 1971. Handbook
of Human Engin eering Design Data for Reduced Gravity Conditions .
NASA CR-1726.
McFarland, R. A., A. Damon, and H. W. Stoudt, Jr. 1958. "Anthropometry
in the Design of the Drivers' Workspace," Amer . J. of Phys.
Anthrop . , 16:1-23.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration/European Space
Administration 1976. Spacelab Payload Accommodation Handbook .
SLP/2104, Special print for Life Sciences, Preliminary, May.
Stoudt, Howard W. , Albert Damon, Ross A. McFarland, and Jean Roberts
1965. Weight, Height, and Selected Body Dimensions of Adults -
United States, 19b0-62 . Public Health Service Publication
No. 1000 - Series 11, No. 8, Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, National Center for Health Statistics, Washington, D.C.
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
The following documents are not readily available because of
limited distribution (unpublished or preliminary data). However,
copies/information may be obtained by contacting the author/ source.
Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories n.d. 1980-1990 Anthropometric
Data for Use in Spacelab Design . Unpublished Report, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Chaffee, J. W. 1968. A Method of Determining the Maximum One-Handed
Grasping Ergosphere in an Automotive Package Interior, Part I:
Forward Panels . Anthropometric Laboratory, Automotive Safety
Research Office, Ford Motor Co., Dearborn, Mich.
Church, R. A., J. A. Ciciora, K. L. Porter, and G. E. Stevenson 1976.
Concept Design and Alternate Arrangements of Orbiter Mid-Deck
Habitability Features . Nelson and Johnson Engineering Company,
for NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Tex.
Emanuel, I., and C. A. Dempsey 1955. Unpublished data, Wright-Patterson
Air Force Base, Ohio.
General Electric Space Division 1969 . Human Engineering Criteria for
Maintenance and Repair of Advanced Space Systems . Final Study
Report , Volumes I-IV, DN 69SD4294, NASA George C. Marshall Space
Flight Center, Huntsville, Ala.
V-67
I
r
Y
lilllllSlIIfilSi&IlIlfi
\ i
Jackson, J., R. Bond, and R. Gundersen 1975. "Neutral Body Posture in
Zero-G," Man-Machine Engineering Data Applications of Skylab
Experiments M4871M516 , Bulletin 17, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Tex.
Kennedy, K, W. 1976. Reach Capabilities of Men and Women . Doctoral
dissertation (unpublished;. Union Graduate School, Yellow Springs,
Ohio. ?
Laubach, L. L., and M. Alexander n.d. Leg Reach Measurements . Unpub-
lished data, Webb Associates, Yellow Springs, Ohio.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1974. Man/ System Design
Criteria for Manned Orbiting Payloads, Section 5'. Anthropometry/
Crew Capability . MSFCC-STD-512, Man/System Integration Branch,
System Analysis Laboratory, NASA George C. Marshall Space Flight _
Center, Huntsville, Ala. |
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1975c. Astronaut Skylab
Crew Debriefing . Unpublished data, NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space
Center, Houston, Tex.
Wright, I. B. 1964. "Applications of a System of Functional Anthropo-
metry in Pressure Suit Design," J. of British Interplanetary Soci-
ety , 13:31-41. J
V-68
1'
Y
UilllLlLilliiklllllill'L
I i
CHAPTER VI
RANGE OF JOINT MOTION
by jf
Lloyd L. Laubach .
Anthropology Research Project
Webb Associates
The range of motion of body joints is obviously an important factor
in the assessment of body mobility or in the determination of arm and leg
reach capabilities. In Chapter V, Stoudt discussed many of the problems faced
by the design engineer who must determine the capability of the operator to |?
reach, grasp, and actuate various controls. The information presented in this •■
chapter, integrated with Stoudt' s work, should enable the designer to better \
lay out work stations. \
In this chapter we will discuss (1) selected reviews of the range of
joint motion literature; (2) techniques for measuring range of joint motion;
(3) range of joint motion terminology; (4) recommended range of joint motion
data for the design engineer; (5) differences in the range of joint motion
due to the effects of age; (6) differences in range of joint motion between J(
men and women; (7) the assessment of differences in range of joint motion
caused by protective clothing; and (8) the range of joint motion of selected
two- joint muscles.
Selected Review of the Literature
The best of the several reviews of the literature pertaining to the
range of joint motion measurement are those by Holland (1968) and Clarke [f
(1975), These two papers cite 136 and 55 references, respectively, pertain-
ing to different aspects of the range of joint motion. Although they are
geared toward the physical educator and the physical therapist, these two
excellent reviews point out many of the kinds of problems the design engineer
will encounter when dealing with range of motion data. Por example, the
following generalizations, drawn from Holland's paper are pertinent to the
concerns of design engineers:
(1) There appears to be little agreement with regard to the definition K.
and limits of so-called normal flexibility, and with regard to what consti-
tutes hypo- or hyper-flexible joint range of motion.
(2) There appears to be general agreement that range of joint motion
is a highly specific factor and that measurement of one or several body
joints cannot be used to validly predict range of motion in other body parts.
(3) The use of linear techniques to measure rotational joint motion
involves rather gross mathematical error; they should not be used for the
collection of objective clinical or experimental data. Although there is
VI- 1
litiJiiillLll^llllllili
Y
conflicting evidence, it appears also that individual limb and trunk length
variability may significantly affect the validity of linear range of motion
measurements.
m
Techniques for Measuring Range of Joint Motion
The problem of accurately evaluating the range of motion of body joints
has been, and continues to be, a perplexing one. A number of techniques and
devices have been proposed for measuring range of joint motion but none has
received widespread acceptance. Adrian (1968), the American Academy of Ortho-
pedic Surgeons "(1965), Ayoub (1972), Clarke (1975), Dempster (1955), Garrett,
Widule, and Garrett (1968), Holland (1968), Leighton (1955), Miller and
Nelson (1973), Plagenhoff (1971) and Roebuck, Kroemer, and Thomson ( 1975)
have discussed in some detail the advantages and disadvantages of past and
current techniques and equipment. It is beyond the scope of this chapter to
discuss each of these techniques and procedures. The reader who is interested
in knowing more about range of joint motion measuring techniques and
equipment is referred to the above mentioned sources. However, because the
majority of the data we will present later in this chapter have been
developed from goniometry, the Leighton flexometer, and photography, we will
briefly discuss these techniques.
The goniometer consists of a 180-degree protractor, usually made of
plexiglass, with extended arms approximately 40 centimeters long. One of
the arms is fixed to the zero line of the protractor while the other is mov-
able. Although the goniometer is a very simple device and is subject to
inherent errors in measurement due to the complexity of human body joint
movements, it provides an extremely valuable tool for range of joint motion
analysis.
The flexometer was developed by Leighton (1955) for measuring joint
angles without regard to shifting joint centers. This instrument has a rotat-
ing, weighted 360-degree dial and a weighted, movable pointer mounted in
a glass-enclosed metal case. The dial and the pointer operate independently
and are balanced so they always point upward. The movements of the dial and
the pointer are controlled by gravity. The flexometer is strapped to the
segment being tested. The dial is locked at one extreme position (e.g., full
flexion of the knee) and the pointer is locked at the other after complete
movement of the joint has been effected (e.g., full extension of the knee).
A direct reading of the pointer on the dial gives the range of joint movement
in angular degrees. Leighton has developed 19 range of joint motion tests:
neck flexion-extension, lateral flexion, and rotation; shoulder flexion-
extension, adduction-abduction, and rotation; elbow flexion-extension; radi-
al-ulnar supination-pronation; wrist flexion-extension and ulnar-radial fle-
xion; hip extension-flexion, adduction-abduction, and rotation; knee flexion-
extension; ankle flexion-extension and inversion-eversion; trunk flexion-
extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. Roebuck (1968) and Roebuck,
Kroemer, and Thomson (1975) have discussed the utilization of the flexometer
in measuring mobility of men clothed in pressurized and unpressurized space
suits.
I'
I'
Y
Y
VI-2
IIIIll]iIKliliM££fiIIlIIL
VI-3
f
i i
A . photographic method, often employing double exposures, was developed
by Dempster (1955) and was used for recording the range of movement of the
limb joints. Photographs were made on 35-mm film with an Argus camera by
the flash of a speed lamp. The room was darkened and black backgrounds were
provided. For double exposures an initial flash exposure recorded one extreme
of a joint range; the lens was then kept open following exposure until the
subject assumed an opposing position at which point a second flash exposure
was made. Parts of the body which would otherwise present a conflicting back-
ground for the test joints were covered with black velveteen cloth.
A special work table, painted black, was employed as a support for
the subject or his limb segments. Horizontal lines were marked on the table
edge with light-reflecting tape to serve as references. Frames of the strip
of negatives were projected as enlarged images and the best estimates of
link lines connecting joint centers were ruled on paper; horizontal or
vertical reference lines were also traced. Angles were then measured with
a protractor to the nearest degree.
These techniques have been extensively used and further developed by
various researchers working in the area of range of joint motion assessment.
Range of Joint Motion Terminology i-
The range of joint motion is measured at the angle formed by the long
axes of two adjoining body segments, or, in some cases, at the angle formed
by one body segment and a vertical or horizontal plane. The total range of
movement is measured between the two extreme positions of the joint.
Joint movements in the classical kinesiological terminology are consid-
ered to begin from the so-called anatomical position. This position is
defined as that of a man standing upright, head facing forward, arms hanging y
down with palms facing forward. The ten types of joint movement that
primarily concern the design engineer are:
(1) Flexion - bending or decreasing the angle between the parts of
the body. Supplementing the more commonly measured arm and leg flexions,
Kelly (1971) has identified several kinds of flexion to meet special descrip-
tive needs. These are: trunk lateral flexion in which the trunk segments
move so as to decrease the angle between them and the right thigh; radial
flexion which refers to the movement of the thumb side of the hand toward ^
the radial side of the forearm segments; and ulnar flexion which refers to
the opposite side of the hand's movement toward the ulnar side of the forearm
segment.
(2) Extension - straightening or increasing the angle between the
parts of the body. It is generally defined as the return from flexion. When
a joint is extended beyond the normal range of its movement, the movement
becomes known as hyperextension.
I'
UllllLlIllilllllllliL
1 1
(3) Abduction - movement of a body segment away from the midline of
the body or body part to which it is attached.
(4) Adduction - movement of a body segment or segment combination
toward the midline of the body or body part to which it is attached.
(5) Medial rotation - turning toward the midline of the body.
(6) Lateral rotation - turning away from the midline of the body.
(7) Pronation - rotating the forearm so that the palm faces downward.
(8) Supination - rotating the forearm so that the palm faces upward.
(9) Eversion - rotation of the foot which lifts its lateral border
to turn the sole or plantar surface outward.
(10) Inversion - lifting the medial border of the foot to turn the
sole inward.
Roebuck (1975) firmly believes that the above described classical move-
ment terminology can be misleading and inappropriate. In an effort to provide
a more precise terminology for the engineering anthropometrist , Roebuck has \;
developed a very elaborate and comprehensive new system of notation for
mobility evaluation. While it is beyond the scope of this chapter to discuss
the details of Roebuck's new system, the interested reader is referred to
Chapter III, "Measurement of Dynamic Characteristics and Movement," pages 79-
92, and Appendix A, Part 3, "Engineering Anthropometry Terminology," pages
423-425 in Roebuck, Kroemer, and Thomson's book entitled Engineering Anthro -
pometry Methods.
Recommended Range of Joint Motion Data for the Design Engineer
VI-4
r
1'
In spite of the many techniques and test procedures that have been
developed for the measurement of range of joint motion, there is a paucity
of descriptive data that can be used by the design engineer. Much of the
research has been undertaken by investigators working in the areas of physi-
cal education, physical therapy, sports medicine and rehabilitation medicine.
Obviously, the research purposes and objectives of these investigators differ _
greatly from those of the design engineer. Nevertheless, the data which are ^
available do characterize the range of human joint motion for many NASA
design applications although the effects of prolonged weightlessness on joint
motion have not yet been systematically investigated.
I'
UllfililMIJiMMIIfllllliE
TABLE 1
RANGE OF JOINT MOTION VALUES*
(Barter, Emanuel and Truett, 1957)
MALES
I I
Movement
Shoulder flexion
Shoulder extension
Shoulder abduction
Shoulder adduction
Shoulder medial rotation
Shoulder lateral rotation
Elbow flexion
142
SD
10
5% lie
126
95%ile
188
12
168
208
61
14
38
84
134
17
106
162
48
9
33
63
97
22
61
133
34
13
13
55
159
?
Forearm supination
Forearm pronation
Wrist flexion
Wrist extension
Wrist abduction
Wrist adduction
Hip flexion
Hip abduction
H ip addu ct ion
Hip medial rotation (prone)
Hip lateral rotation (prone)
Hip medial rotation (sitting)
Hip lateral rotation (sitting)
Knee flexion, voluntary (prone)
Knee flexion, forearm (prone)
Knee flexion, voluntary
( standing)
Knee flexion forced (kneeling)
Knee medial rotation (sitting)
Knee lateral rotation (sitting)
Ankle flexion
Ankle extension
Foot Inversion
Foot everslon
*Mea8urement technique was photography,
males. Data are In angular degrees.
113
22
77
149
77
24
37
117
90
12
70
110
99
13
78
120
27
9
12
42
47
7
35
59
113
13
92
134
53
12
33
73
31
12
11
51
39
10
23
56
34
10
18
51
31
9
16
46
30
9
15
45
125
10
109
142
144
•9
129
159
113
13
92
134
159
9
144
174
35
12
15
55
43
12
23
63
35
7
23
47
38
12
IS
58
24
9
9
39
23
7
11
35
Subjects were college-age
1'
I
Y
VI-5
llIllMilMMJiMMilKMJilll
VI-6
li
TABLE 2
RANGE OF JOINT MOTION VALUES*
(Harris and Harris, 1968)
FEMALES
Movement Mean SD 5%i>e 95y.tle y
Neck flexion
Neck extension
Neck-lateral flexion, right
Neck-lateral flexion, left
Neck rotation, right
Neck rotation, left
Spine flexion
Spine extension
Spine lateral flexion, right
Spine lateral flexion, left
Spine rotation, right
Spine rotation, left
Shoulder flexion
Shoulder extension
Shoulder abduction-adduction
Shoulder medial rotation
Shoulder lateral rotation
Shoulder horizontal abduction
Shoulder horizontal adduction
Elbow flexion-extension
Elbow hyperextension
Radioulnar supination
Radioulnar pronation
Wrist flexion
Wrist extension
Wrist abduction
Wrist adduction
Hip flexion, center
Hip flexion, rlg^t
Hip extension, center
Hip extension, right
Hip abduction-adduction
Hip horizontal abduction
Hip horizontal adduction
Hip lateral rotation
Hip medial rotation
Ankle flexion
Ankle extension
Ankle inversion
Ankle everslon
58.7
10.3
41.7
75.7
89.3
9.9
73.0
105.6
50.5
7.6
38.0
63.0
47.2
8.0
34.0
60.4
83.1
10.2
66.3
99.9
78.5
11.2
60.0
97.0
61.9
11.3
43.3
80.5
29.3
12.5
8.7
49.9
57.8
8.9
43.1
72.5
58.0
8.7
43.6
72.4
65.4
10.6
47.9
82.9
62.8
10.5
45.5
80.1
167.9
10.0
151.4
184.4
41.5
10.0
25.0
58.0
169.5
11.2
151.0
188.0
160.0
12.5
139.4
180.6
33.6
11.1
15.3
51.9
126.6
15.4
101.2
152.0
38.9
6.6
28.0
49.8
151.4
7.1
139.7
163.1
7.6
6.4
3.0
18.2
88.9
17.1
60.7
117.1
101.9
15.2
76.8
127.0
79.7
15.1
54.8
104.6
60.6
10.5
43.3
77.9
29.7
9.1
14.7
44.7
50.4
10.8
32.6
68.2
79.6
14.5
55.7
103.5
94.6
11.3
76.0
113.2
15.4
6.6
4.5
26.3
18.1
6.2
7.9
28.3
71.8
11.6
52.7
90.9
49.5
7.9
36.5
62.5
25.3
5.6
16.1
34.5
55.8
9.5
40.1
71.5
43.8
11.6
24.7
62.9
133.8
7.8
120.9
146.7
11.3
4.9
3.2
19.4
18.8
6.2
8.6
29.0
49.7
8.6
35.5
63.9
37.6
10.8
19.8
55.4
30.0
9.5
14.3
45.7
^'Measurement technique was flexometer. Subjects were colleae-age females
Data arc in angular degrees.
L'
1'
Knee flexion-extension 133.8 7.8 120.9 146.7 \
Knee hyperextension " " " "
I'
UIIlflMSlJiMlifiMIIllIIk
i i
The descriptive range of joint motion data presented in the following
tables were selected for their usefulness to design engineers.'" Table 1 gives
values for males; Table 2 tabulates women's values. The differences which
are readily apparent in comparing like measurements can be attributed to
two major causes. The first, of course, is the difference in sexes; it can
be noted that in many cases where measurements are comparable, one sex or
the other appears to be considerably more flexible. (Table 3, in the next
section, details percentile differences between selected male and female
joint motion measurements). A second source of possible discrepancy between
the male and female data is the difference in measurement techniques employed
in the two studies.
Variations in Range of Joint Motion Measurements
Differences Between Men and Women
The most carefully controlled study that we know of pertaining to the
measured differences in range of joint motion between adult men and women
was conducted by Sinelkinoff and Grigorowitsch (1931). Their study of 100
men and 100 women ranging in age from 20 to 50 years, indicated that, in
general, women exceed men in range of joint motion measurements at all joints
except the knee. Table 3 summarizes the data reported by Sinelkinoff and
Grigorowitsch and reveals percentage differences between men and women in
range of joint mobility ranging from zero percent for knee flexion-extension,
to 177o for wrist adduction- abduct ion.
TABLE 3
DIFFERENCE IN RANGE OF JOINT MOTION BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN
(Based on Sinelkinoff and Grigorowitsch, 1931)--
Shoulder abduction (rearward)
Elbow flexion-extension
Wrist flexion-extension
Wrist adduction-abduction
Hip flexion (with extended knee)
Hip flexion (with bent knee)
Knee flexion-extension
Ankle flexion-extension
^Percentage differences obtained by dividing the women's reported
mean value by the men's reported mean value; e.g., 61.4 divided
by 59.8 = lOT/o.
**Mean values reported in angular degrees.
Men' s X
Women' s X
Difference
59.8 **
61.4
103%
142.1
149.9
105%
141.4
154.0
1097o
62.2
72.7
11770
83.5
86.8
104%
117.9
121.0
103%
140.5
140.1
100%
62.6
66.9
107%
*Additional sources of specific range of joint motion data include: the
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (1965), Dickinson (1963), Gilliland
(1921), Glanville and Kreezer (1937), Kendall and Kendall (1948), Laubach
(1970), and Sinelkinoff and Grigorowitsch (1931).
t'
r
I'
VI-7
liBlfiMMfiSJifilLILS
I I i I I k
i i
Assessing Differences Caused by Protective Clothing
Like, all other dynamic measurements, range of joint motion is signifi-
cantly affected by bulky protective clothing. Little data has been developed
on the modifications in joint motion which occur as a result of heavy
clothing assemblies and what data have been generated are of limited value v
since measurements taken in a given protective garment are not likely to
match those taken in another. Since each protective garment is dimensionally
unique, the most useful information we can offer NASA design engineers is the
description of a method by which joint motion changes can best be evaluated
in any suit. A technique which has considerable merit was devised by the
Navy to analyze two diving suits and was reported on by Bachrach et al . in
1975. Though not directly relevant to NASA design engineering problems, this
study has been chosen for presentation here because of the feasibility of
the research design for the practicing engineer and its applicability to f
the evaluation of joint motion in newly developed NASA pressure suits.
Six male U.S. Navy divers served as subjects. Each subject served as
his own control with his baseline measurements taken in a swim suit before
donning either of the two diving systems under study. Fourteen range of joint
motion measurements were obtained from each subject, both on dry land and
in the water. Data was summarized in the following fashion:
Movement
Swim Suit
Dry
Suit I
Suit II
Wet
Suit I
Suit II
Trunk Plexion
Mean
S.D.
116.4°
7.5°
103.3°
7.7°
103.4°
10.3°
83.1°
9.9°
84.9°
15.3°
I
r
The summary data were further analyzed to arrive at the mean percentage loss
of diver flexibility caused by the two diving suits. These data, shown in
Table 4, make it clear that Suit II affords the diver considerable more
flexibility than does Suit I.
It is recommended that NASA designers use a comparable method--in which
subjects serve as their own controls and the garment is tested under the
conditions in which it will be worn--to assess the degree to which newly
developed pressure suits hamper movement in their wearers. Joint motions to
be measured would, of course, be selected for their relevance to operation in
a zero g environment. " L
The Effects of Age
Under normal circumstances the range of joint motion decreases only
slightly during the adult years between age 20 and age 60. West (1945) has
reported that between the first and seventh decades of life range of joint
motion declines about 10 percent, but no significant changes occur after
puberty (Salter and Darcus, 1953). So for all practical purposes the designer if
can ignore the effects of age on the range of joint motion for the adult
population.
VI-8
liillMUlifiMilMiLkllLilli;
I i
TABLE 4
MEAN PERCENTAGE LOSS OF DIVER FLEXIBILITY CAUSED BY TWO
DIVING SUITS (Based on Bachrach et al . 1975)
Movement
Dry
Wet
Suit I
Suit II
Suit I
Suit II
11.17o
11.27o
28.5%
26.9%
26.9
12.5
38.1
26.8
27.2
12.3
29.9
31.0
42.2
37.8
29.5
31.3
40.4
22.1
35.9
17.6
47.5
24.1
39.3
16.1
29.8
20.2
12.9
13.0
37.0
23.7
39.0
22.0
34.6
29.6
23.2
24.9
7.9
8.7
6.4
5.4
24.8
11.1
17.7
8.0
35.6
32.9
25.1
24.8
46.7
30.0
43.8
31.0
56.8
42.4
40.8
21.1
33.3
22.7
29.3
21.4
1'
Trunk flexion
Trunk extension
Trunk lateral flexion
Trunk transverse rotation
Shoulder joint abduction
Shoulder joint flexion
Shoulder joint extension
Shoulder joint hor. flexion 37.0
Shoulder joint hor.
extension
Elbow flexion
Knee flexion
Hip flexion
Hip extension
Hip abduction .
Overall mean loss 33.3 22.7 29.3 21.4 "I;'
Range of Motion of Two-Joint Muscles
Up to this point we have discussed joint motion as though each joint
existed in isolation from all others. Most investigations of range of joint
motion have been confined to the study of simple planar movement of a single
joint and these data are of singular importance in our understanding of human
motion as well as of practical value to designers dealing with many prob-
lems of workspace layout. The placement of a sidearm controller when the
forearm is restrained, for example, is dictated by the range of motion of
the wrist alone. However, more often than not, human motion involves the
interaction of two or more joints and muscles. Little is known about the
effect of one upon the other although we know, for example, that hand prona-
tion is considerably increased if shoulder motion also comes into play.
One common type of dynamic interaction involves two- joint muscles in - t
which the action of one joint may either increase or decrease the effective
functioning of the other. The problem of evaluating the range of motion of
two-joint muscles has received little attention in the research literature.
Brunnstrom (1972), Markee et al. (1955), Steindler (1970), and Rasch and
Burke (1971) discuss the biomechanical advantages and disadvantages of two-
joint muscles which have potential excursions far beyond the range achieved
by one- joint muscles. While this may be an advantage under certain condi-
tions, such interaction may also expose the muscle to the hazards of
stretching beyond safe limits (Brunnstrom 1972). The efficiency of the two- Y
joint muscles is substantially influenced by the position of the two joints
VI- 9
liSlMMUMMMIlifii^lilLifilik
li
in accordance with principles governing length-tension relationships of
muscles. (The subject has received attention by Basmajian (1957), McLachlin
(1969), Olson and Waterland (1967) and Paul (1969) among others.)
There is, however, an almost complete lack of descriptive information
in the research literature on specific range of joint motion to show what *^
happens to shoulder flexion, for example, when the elbow is flexed to two-
thirds of its total joint range. In a heretofore unpublished piece of re-
search prepared for the Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright
Patterson Air Porce Base, Ohio, in 1971, Laubach and McConville reported on
an experimental technique for the evaluation of range of motion of selected
two-joint muscles. While emphasis in the study was on the development of a
usable technique, some of the summary data are presented below.
Using 18 male subjects and a mock-up of a standard USAF aircraft seat T
(see Figure 1), investigators selected the following two- joint muscle actions
for evaluation:
(1) elbow flexion with shoulder extension
(2) shoulder extension with elbow flexion
(3) elbow flexion with shoulder flexion
(4) shoulder flexion with elbow flexion
(5) hip flexion with knee flexion
(6) knee flexion with hip flexion
(7) knee flexion with ankle plantar flexion
(8) ankle plantar flexion with knee flexion
(9) knee flexion with ankle dorsiflexion
(10) ankle dorsiflexion with knee flexion
*
The experimental protocol for the determination of range of motion
for two-joint muscles involved several steps. The range of motion for single
joint muscle actions was established by photogoniometry. In our tests, a \f
rapid- sequence camera was used to record the orientation of the segments
at the beginning and end of a joint movement. Oversize prints were then made
on which the range of motion could be measured. Range of motion for the two-
joint muscles was evaluated using a combination of electrogoniometry and
photogoniometry. The electrogoniometer was used to assure a positive fix
for the distal joint at a point in its range of motion while the adjacent
joint was being exercised.
The restrictions in joint motion caused by blockage with another body " fe
segment were ignored. Por example, elbow flexion is greatly reduced when
the shoulder is extended and rotated inward, a decrement caused by the fore-
arm in flexion striking the posterior torso. Every attempt was made to
isolate the joint motion to a pure motion in a single plane from a single
joint.
][
VI- 10
BSIXMltllJillllLillilllifL
Zero Positions for Measurement
A significant problem in studying two-joint muscles is defining the
division of the range of movement between flexion and extension, adduction
and abduction, etc. If we define the movement of the shoulder in the sagittal
plane as extension and flexion, then we must define the origin of the two
motions from a common point. In a general sense we might state that the point
of origin of the two motions is with the upper arm hanging loosely at the
side, or in the mid-axillary line or assuming some other specified orienta-
tion. Unless this origin is firmly established--while the total range of
joint motion may remain the same--the values for flexion and extension may
change radically and show a negative relationship with one another. It has
been suggested that the proper measure of flexibility is the total range of
motion without attempting to break it down into two discrete movements.
Dickinson (1963), however, believes that the two movements which con-
stitute the range of motion to be so poorly related that "adding these two
measures of flexibility would be like adding apples and oranges" and suggests
that a stable origin point is possible to achieve. We are of a similar
opinion and in each instance have divided the total range of motion at a
joint into a series of discrete movements. Figures 2-6 define the terminology
which applies to the various movements studied and indicate their points of
origin.
Test Procedures
The range of joint motion was obtained by measuring the angular change
from sequential photos taken when a joint was rotated from its zero position
to its maximum.
The generalized test procedure used in the study was as follows:
A joint range base line was established for each of the joints to be tested.
The , base line was measured with the adjacent joints held in the zero
position. Each joint was tested twice for agreement and the greater values
were used as the joint range of motion. After the base line value was
established the adjacent joint was moved to one of two or three intermediate
positions (1/2 and total, or 1/3, 2/3 and total range) and the test joint was
again exercised throughout its range. The procedure was then reversed with
the joint first tested being held at an intermediate point of its range of
motipn and the adjacent joint being exercised.
1'
!'
b
The changes in range of motion of a given joint when supplemented by
the movement of an adjacent joint are summarized in Table 5. Shown in this
table are the base line values of given joint motions with the adjacent joint
in neutral position; the increment or decrement which takes place when an
adjacent joint is flexed or extended in varying amounts (1/3, 1/2, 2/3 and/or
full) ; and the resulting value as a percentage of the baseline value. Tor
example, the first entry on Table 5 is read as follows: the shoulder can
be extended as far as 59.3° (the mean of the subjects tested) with the elbow V
in a neutral position (locked in hyper- extension). When shoulder extension
was measured with the elbow flexed to 1/3 of its full joint range, the mean
VI- 11
UllfiMUMIfiMllJlMMIlfillL
n
37.5 cm
Figure 1. Two-joint muscle
test apparatus.
# .Zero point:
located on the torso
from center of the
axilla to the iliac
crest.
shoulder
flexion
shoulder
extension
I
I
VI- 12
Figure 2, Shoulder extension-
flexion.
I'
]IIllM]i]IIM]l£]L£
1 fi 1 £
' * Zero point: elbow
locked in straight-arm position.
elbow
flexion
Figure 3. Elbow flexion.
f
» « Zero point:
located along the
calf with the foot
resting on a platform
parallel to the floor.
I'
ankle dorsi
--1 flexion
ankle plantar
flexion
Figure 4. Ankle flexion.
I
Y
VI- 13
UllllLUIlilLllllillli
1 1
• • Zero point:
located on the torso
from center of the
axilla to the iliac
crest.
hip
flexion „
I
Figure 5. Hip flexion.
Zero point:
located along the thigh
with the knee locked in
a straight leg position.
t
r
knee
flexion
Figure 6. Knee flexion.
VI- 14
I'
HllIliililliililLli
I 1 1 I £ L
1 1
U3
.J
CJ>
1-^
o 5::
. .
in 00
+ o
1— t
o ^s
o- o
. .
r~ m
1 ^-^
-1.22°
(99.27.)
CTv ^
1 s»'
-12.3°
(76.97.)
+1.6°
(103.3%)
-3.2°
(87.7%)
-4.7°
(96.3%)
-8.7°
(93.0%)
-33.6°
(73.5%)
n
CM
O f5
CJ^ in
• .
f— 1
f^
^ o
. .
vO r-l
ro 00
o ^5
00 in
. .
o o
O Sif
CM <!•
. .
VO CO
1 CO
O 5^
• •
O f5
. .
eg CJ>
1 CO
CM
i-i
00 ^s
. .
CO r~
O B^
Ov CM
. .
CJs CM
1 ON
o ^
. vO
<3s .
1-1 >3-
1 00
f— 1
fS
. .
.-J eg
+ O
•-4
O sJ!
OS 6n
. .
<)• vD
CM 00
1 >-'
o ^s
. .
O C3^
■ O^
>-•
O B^
o b
. .
eg m
1 <»•
O £?
. .
ro CM
1 Ov
m b
. .
r- CM
1 r^
2
°vO?g°
. .
u-( CO
1 <«•
c
-H
t— 1
01
(n
(0
m
o
.
CJ^
m
o
i
o
CM
.
CM
m
i-H
o
«M
.
CM
m
o
.
U1
o
o
.
00
O
1-1
.
vO
CM
o
o
.
CM
1-1
o
o
.
CM
1-1
o
o
.
CM
1—1
»— t
01
J5
4J
•H
c
o
•H
en
o
y.
o
» 'H
T) >;
3 •-<
O u-(
I?;
c
o
•H
X
<u
■-H
<4-l
f— 1
0)
ji:
•H
c
o
y.
o
1— t
o
&
<1>
"O
r-(
3
o
x;
en
ui:
u
•H
3
C
o
•H C
X o
1-1 (fl
»M C
0)
^ s
c
o
y.
(U
f-H
>U
Vl
V
f-l
3
j::
•H
C
o
•H
X
1^
1
C
o
X
(U
VM
v
(U
c
•C
4J
•H
e
o
•H
X
u
a
c
o
X o
01 -f-l
-^ X
U-l 0)
t-l U-(
4J u
c u
n e
U 4J
-^ -W
•^ =^
c
c o
-r^
•H X
X 4)
OJ 1-1
1-1 IW
IW
•H W
(A V
ii e
^•^
.c
01 4J
1-1 -H
<
<U
1— 1
c
X, c
4J O
•H -H
? X
c ^
M
•H
X ^1
0) (0
i-t 4J
«-i c
ID
0) ^
01 o.
0)
1-1
c
? c
o
C -H
O X
•H 0)
X ^
OJ iw
1-1 -H
u-l in
0) o
0) XJ
c
c
o
•H
X
01
1—1
u-l
O.
•H
x;
j:
4-1
•H
c
o
•iH
X
«
1—1
u-l
0)
o;
c
:>^
4J
O
0)
•*— >
X)
D
in
01
x:
4J
c
o
u
4J
D
o
c
0)
4-1
X
0)
t)0
0)
4-1
M
O
o.
D
Ul
C
3
0)
Xi
•T3
C
(d
T3
0)
o
f
1
r
OJ
o;
c
.:^
H
r
VI- 15
llIlllMfllliiiiifiSilllfilll
VI- 16
f
m
value of shoulder extension was found to increase by 1.6° or 102. 77o of the
base value. The results for the other movements and adjacent joint positions
are presented in similar manner.
In a very general way these results suggest that:
(1) Shoulder extension is slightly enhanced with full flexion of the
elbow.
(2) There is a marked decrement in shoulder flexion as the degree
of elbow flexion increases.
(3) Elbow flexion is little reduced with varying degrees of shoulder
flexion-extension except for the marked reduction when the shoulder is fully
flexed. This test produced the largest variance in subject response, with
some subjects showing little or no elbow flexion possible at full shoulder
flexion while others showed only minor decrements.
(4) Hip flexion decrements occur with any variation from baseline
position. It is believed that we are dealing with two factors here. In the
zero (straight leg) and 1/3 knee flexion position the center of mass of the
leg has moved distally and the weight of the unsupported leg out in front
of the subject reduced significantly the subject's ability to flex his hip.
In the 2/3 and full knee flexion positions we believe the data reflect more
directly the effects of the two-joint muscle placement.
(5) Ankle plantar flexion is slightly enhanced by increased knee flex-
ion.
(6) Ankle dorsiflexion is substantially reduced with knee flexion
from the base position.
(7) Knee flexion is slightly reduced with ankle plantar and dorsi-
flexion and is markedly reduced with increased hip flexion.
There is an obvious need for more carefully controlled range of joint
motion research. "For NASA design engineers we recommend that the following
list of standard movements, suggested by Roebuck et al. (1975), be assessed
for space suit range of motion measurements.
Neck Plexion-Extension " c
Neck Lateral Tlexion, Left and Right
Porearm Supination-Pronation
Wrist Palmar Flexion-Dorsif lexion
Hip Abduction-Adduction
Hip Plexion-Extension
Shoulder Plexion-Extension
Shoulder Abduction-Adduction
Neck Rotation, Left and Right
Shoulder Rotation, Inward and Outward
Elbow Plexion-Extension
1
1'
Y
Jlilliilllli^llllllll,.
Wrist Radial Tlexion-Ulnar Tlexion
Hip Rotation, Outward and Inward
Ankle Flexion-Extension
Trunk Rotation, Right and Left
Shoulder Horizontal Adduction-Abduction
Knee Plexion-Extension and Hyperextension
Toe Dorsiflexion
Trunk Flexion-Extension
Trunk Lateral Plexion, Left and Right
Summary
VI- 17
r
A summary of our major findings and recommendations for design engin-
eers are as follows:
(1) The techniques of photography, goniometry, and the flexometer
offer practical and realistic means of evaluating the range of
joint motion.
(2) The data presented in Table 1 compiled from Barter et al. (1957)
can be used for "normative" values of range of joint motion data •\
for adult males. Use the data presented in Table 2 compiled from
Harris and Harris (1968) for females.
(3) If it becomes necessary to estimate differences in the range of
joint motion between the adult sexes. Table 3 reveals percentage
differences for eight different joint range measurements.
(4) Changes in range of joint motion caused by protective clothing
can be significant but are usually suit-specific. Test procedures, ]'
such as the one recommended in this chapter, should be undertaken
for each new NASA assembly.
(5) Few descriptive data have been generated on the effects of inter-
acting joints on motion. A test procedure has been described and
a list of joint interactions relevant to space operations has
been suggested for investigation.
I
Y
lilllMMMMMUllfiiLttlLIII^
REFERENCES
Adrian, Marlene J. 1968. "An Introduction to Electrogoniometry." Kine -
siology Review 1968 , American Association for Health, Physical
Education, and Recreation (Washington, D.C.), pp. 12-18.
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Committee for the Study of T-
Joint Motion 1965. Joint Motion - Method of Measuring and
Recording , American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (Chicago,
111.).
Ayoub, M. M. 1972. "Human Movement Recording for Biomechanical
Analysis," International J. of Production Research , 10(1):35-51.
Bachrach, Arthur J., Glen H. Egstrom, and Susan M. Blackmun 1975.
"Biomechanical Analysis of the U.S. Navy Mark V and Mark XII c
Diving Systems,'' Human Factors , 17(4) :328-336 . ^
Barter, James T., Irvin Emanuel, and Bruce Truett 1957. A Statistical
Evaluation of Joint Range Data . WADC-TN-57-311, Wright Air
Development Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
Gilliland, A. R. 1921. "Norms for Amplitude of Voluntary Joint
Movement," J. of the Amer . Med. Assoc , 77(17):1357.
Glanville, A. Douglas, and Georege Kreezer 1937. "The Maximum Amplitude
and Velocity of Joint Movements in Normal Male Human Subjects,"
Human Biology , 9(2): 197-211.
Harris, Margaret L., and Chester W. Harris 1968. A Factor Analytic Study
of Flexibility . Paper Presented at the National Convention of the
American Association of Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation, Research Section, St, Louis, Mo.
VI-18
I
Basmajian, J. V. 1957. "Electromyography in Two- Joint Muscles," Ana -
tomical Record , 129:371-380.
Brunnstrom, Signe 1972. Clinical Kinesiology (3rd edition), F. A. Davis
Co., (Philadelphia, Pa.).
Clarke, H. Harrison 1975. "Joint and Body Range of Movement," Physical
Fitness Research Digest , 5(4):l-22.
Dempster, Wilfred Taylor 1955. Space Requirements of the Seated Opera -
tor . WADC-TR-55-159, Wright Air Development Center, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. V
Garrett, Richard E., Carol J. Widule, and Gladys E. Garrett 1968.
"Computer-Aided Analysis of Human Motion," Kinesiology Review
1968 , American Association for Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation (Washington, D.C.), pp. 1-4.
b
Y
UlLliliLIlli.lll'^llilll
I
Holland, George J. 1968. "The Physiology of Flexibility: A Review of
the Literature," Kinesiology Review 1968 , American Association for
Health, Physical Education, and Recreation (Washington, D.C.),
pp. 49-62.
Kelly, David L. 1971. Kinesiology: Fundamentals of Motion Description ,
Prentice-Hall, Inc. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.), pp. 70-81.
Kendall, Henry, and Florence P. Kendall 1948. "Normal Flexibility
According to Age Groups," J. of Bone and Joint Surgery , 39:424-
428.
Leighton, Jack R. 1955. "An Instrument and Technique for the Measurement
of Range of Joint Motion," Archives of Physical Medicine and
Rehabilitation , 36:571-578.
Markee, J, E. , et al . 1955. "Two- Joint Muscles of a Thigh," J. of Bone
and Joint Surgery , 37-A: 125-142.
Miller, Doris I., and Richard C. Nelson 1973. Biomechanics of Sport ,
Lea and Febiger (Philadelphia, Pa.).
Olson, J. K. , and J. C. Waterland 1967. "Behavior of Independent Joints
Served in Part by Muscles Common to Both: Elbow and Radioulnar
Joints," Perceptual and Motor Skills , 24:339-349. V
Paul, J. P. 1969. "The Action of Some Two-Joint Muscles in the Thigh
During Walking," J. of Anatomy , 105:208-210.
Plagenhoef, Stanley 1971. Patterns of Human Motion: A Cinematographic
Analysis , Prentice-HalTj Inc. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.).
Rasch, Philip J., and R. N. Burke 1971. Kinesiology and Applied Anatomy
(4th edition), Lea and Febiger (Philadelphia, Pa.). |'
Roebuck, J. A., Jr. 1968. "Kinesiology in Engineering," Kinesiology
Review 1968 , American Association for Health, Physical Education,
and Recreation (Washington, D.C.), pp. 5-11.
Roebuck, J. A., Jr., K. H. E. Kroemer , and W. G. Thomson 1975.
Engineering Anthropometry Methods , John Wiley & Sons (New York),
pp. 77-107, - t
k
Salter, N., and H. D. Darcus 1953. "The Amplitude of Forearm and of
Humeral Rotation," J. of Anatomy , 87:407-418.
Sinelkinoff, E., and M. Grigorowitsch 1931. "The Movement of Joints as
a Secondary Sex- and Constitutional-Characteristic," Zeitschrif t
fur Konstitutionslehre , 15(6) :679-693.
Steindler, A. 1970. Kinesiology of the Human Body (3rd printing), If
Charles C. Thomas (Springfield, 111.). ^
VI-19
]IlllMMli£MMii£MfiliIIIi
West, C. C. 1945. "Measurements of Joint Motion," Archives of Physical
Medicine, 26:414-425.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Damon, Albert, Howard W. Stoudt, and Ross A. McFarland 1966. The Human v
Body in Equipment Design. Harvard University Press (Cambridge, =.
Mass.), pp. ^18^19 7 . ^
Harris, Margaret L. 1969. "A Factor Analytic Study of Flexibility,"
Research Quarterly , 40(l):62-70.
Van Cott, Harold P., and Robert G. Kinkade , eds . , 1972. Human Engineer -
ing Guide to Equipment Design (revised edition), American
Institute for Research (Washington, D.C. ) , pp. 543-548. ■;:
Williams, Marian, and Herbert R. Lissner 1962. Biomechanics of Human
Motion , W. B. Saunders Co. (Philadelphia, Pa.) .
ADDITIONAL DATA SOURCES
The following documents are not readily available because of
limited distribution (unpublished or preliminary data). However, -V
copies/information may be obtained by contacting the author/source.
Dickinson, R. V. 1963. Flexibility Measurement: Range of Motion Versus
Limitation of Movement in One Direction . Unpublished Master's
thesis, Univ. of California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Harris, Margaret L. 1967. A Factor Analytic Study of Flexibility .
Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison,
Wis. Y
Laubach, Lloyd L. 1970. Characteristics of the Range of Joint Motion
and Its Relationship to Selected Anthropometric Dimensions and
Somatotype Component's^ Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. The
Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
McLachlin, H. J. 1969. The Action of Selected Two-Joint Muscles of the
Thigh and Leg . Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of _
Oregon, Eugene, Oregon . E
VI-20
I'
IillIlMSIM]lM£IM£iIllL
CHAPTER VII
HUMAN MUSCULAR STRENGTH
by
Lloyd L. Laubach
Anthropology Research Project
Webb Associates
The purposes of this chapter are to review and summarize selected
studies of hijman muscle strength for the guidance of design engineers in
dealing with a large volume of often contradictory strength data, and to
present specific data for direct utilization in workspace design for a
widely variable population. Included in our discussion will be the follow-
ing topic areas:
(1) a general review of human muscular strength;
(2) specificity of muscular strength;
(3) relationships between static and dynamic muscular strength;
(4) strength within the arm reach envelope of the seated subject;
(5) comparative muscular strength of men and women.
Many of the theoretical aspects of muscular strength capabilities
have been discussed in some detail by Roebuck, Kroemer, and Thompson (1975)
in their book entitled Engineering Anthropometry Methods . For the reader
who is interested in pursuing a discussion of the measurement of muscular
strength capabilities, we recommend Chapter IV, pp. 108-128 in that publi-
cation. Other recommended reviews assessing human muscular strength capa-
bilities have been published by Caldwell (1964), Caldwell et al . (1974),
Chaffin (1975), Clarke (1973), Clarke (1966 and 1971), Hettinger (1961),
Hunsicker and Greey (1957), Ikai and Steinhaus (1961), Kroemer (1970),
Kroemer and Howard (1974), and Pipes and Wilmore (1975).
Handbooks that contain data pertinent to muscle strength design prob-
lems include those written or edited by Damon, Stoudt, and McFarland (1966),
Van Cott and Kinkade (1972), and Webb (1964). These handbooks are extremely
useful sources of information to the designer engineer.
Specificity of Muscular Strength
The specificity* of human muscular strength is of major importance
for the engineering application of strength data. The concept of strength
specificity deals with the fact that strength scores, even when exerted
I
*Specificity is the percentage of variance accounted for by other variables 1'
than X and is determined by 1 - r . Generality is defined as the percen-
tage of variance of y accounted for by x and is determined by r . A cor-
relation coefficient of at least .71 is required to show more generality
than specificity: r^ x 100 = 50 percent or more.
VII -1
niiiHHHliLlilllllllli
I i
by the same subjects, do not correlate well with each other. Pursuing this
topic in some detail, Whitley and Allan (1971) have extensively reviewed
the strength related literature. On the basis of their review, of 23 studies
representing a variety of strength tests and measurement techniques, the
authors point out "...that individual differences in static strength ability
demonstrate more specificity than generality." '
This concept was further elucidated by Thordsen, Kroemer, and Laubach
(1972) and Laubach, Kroemer, and Thordsen (1972). They asked their subjects
to exert maximum static force in 44 different exertions. Less than 27o of the
946 intercorrelations among the force exertions exceeded .71, indicating that
such correlations may not be very useful in predicting force capabilities.
The authors concluded that "...if data are desired on forces exertable in
other locations or directions, i.e., under other conditions, than those _
previously investigated, the information generally has to be gathered I
experimentally rather than computed from other force data."
The implications from the above quoted research clearly indicate
that there is no single quantitative function that can be called general
static strength.
I
Static vs. Dynamic Muscular Strength
The relationship between static and dynamic muscular strength in
man is of great concern to design engineers. The ability to predict an
operator's success in performing a dynamic strength task from a measurement
of static muscular strength would be a tremendous asset for the design
engineer who must be concerned with dynamic performance. A large body of
literature has been devoted to the question of whether the amount of force
that can be exerted in a static muscular contraction is a good or a poor
indicator of the amount of force that can be exerted dynamically. Unfortun- Jf
ately, very few unequivocal answers have resulted. A thorough review of
the literature, however, does yield provisional answers to the following
questions pertaining to the relationships between static and dynamic musuclar
strength:
(1) Has there been a definite relationship established between static
and dynamic muscular strength?
(2) Do static muscular force measurements yield larger values than
dynamic force measurements. * T^
(3) During a dynamic muscular contraction, does a concentric or
an eccentric contraction yield the larger value?
(4) What is the relationship between static and dynamic muscular
force during different phases of the contractions?
(5) Can dynamic muscular force be more accurately predicted from
static force if the motion is linear or angular?
Comparisons that have been made between static and dynamic muscular yf
strength have resulted in conflicting opinions about these relationships. t
In studies reported by Asmussen, Hansen and Lammert (1965), Berger and
VII-2
]IIl]IMMIlllli]i]lliIIllIi£L
Higginbotham (1970), Carlson (1970), Rasch (1957), Rasch and Pierson (1960,
1963) and Salter (1955), a high degree of correlation was found between
measures of static and dynamic strength.
Doss and Karpovich (1965), Lagasse (1970), Singh and Karpovich (1966) i:
and Start (1966), on the other hand, have reported erratic results between =.
measures of static and dynamic strength. In a discussion pertaining to
the differing results between static and dynamic strength obtained by vari-
ous investigators Bender and Kaplan (1966) state:
Such conclusions, however, are partly derived from reports
in which force was evaluated by the amount of weight that the
individual could lift through a range of motion and then hold
terminally, whereas the isometric measurement was taken at |i
another point, usually midway, in the joint range of motion.
This raises the question of whether these testing procedures
are comparing the same activity. It is likely that different
muscles or muscle groups are being evaluated when the testing
occurs at distinctly different points within the range of
motion.
Other reasons for these conflicting opinions have been that research-
ers have (1) inadequately defined the testing terminology, (2) utilized •!'
varying intensities of effort, and (3) used different testing positions.
From a thorough review of the muscle strength testing literature,
Hunsicker and Greey (1957) concluded that there is a difference between
static strength (as defined by a single maximum effort with the subject
in a fixed position) and dynamic strength (as defined by repetitious ef-
forts) and that the mathematical relationship between the two is not high.
Doss and Karpovich (1965) compared concentric,* eccentric,** and |"
isometric strength of the elbow flexor muscles. Each subject was given
three tests, repeated three times to measure the maximum force during con-
centric and eccentric movements between 75° and 165° of the elbow angle.
The execution of the concentric and eccentric movements took 18 seconds
each. The isometric measures were taken between 87° and 150° of the elbow
angle and the contractions were maintained at least one second at each
angle. When the three force exertions (concentric, eccentric, and isome-
tric) were compared at corresponding elbow joint angles, it was found that , ^
the mean maximum concentric (pushing) force was 237o smaller and the eccen- K
trie (pulling) force was 13.57o greater than the isometric force.
In a study similar to that of Doss and Karpovich, Singh and Karpovich
(1966) studied the relationships among maximum concentric, eccentric, and
isometric forces of the forearm flexors and extensors. The mean eccentric
*Concentric indicates that the muscle shortens actively against a resis-
tance.
**Eccentric indicates that the muscle is lengthened passively by an external
force.
VII-3
Hil^i^IlllLlllllllll
Y
1 1
forces of the flexors and the extensors were 32.77c. and 14.27o greater
than the concentric forces, respectively. The isometric forces of the flex-
ors were 41.67o greater than the isometric forces of the extensors. Singh
and Karpovich conclude that it is possible to predict the concentric, eccen-
tric, and isometric forces of the flexor muscles from one another. The
same conclusion holds true for predicting the three forces of the extensors \
from one another. However, the chances of predicting the different forces
of the flexors from the extensors, or vice versa, are quite limited.
Using the factor analysis approach, Start and others (1966) studied
the relationships between static strength and power of the lower limb.
Total leg strength was measured using a back and leg dynamometer. The bi-
lateral strength of the ankle plantar flexors, the knee extensors, and
the hip extensors were determined using cable tensiometer techniques. Power
was determined via the power jump, the Sargent jump, the squat jump, and f
the standing broad jump. The authors concluded that power bore little rela-
tionship to static strength and that the two seemed to be separate entities.
Asmussen, Hansen, and Lammert (1965) designed a special dynamometer
to measure isometric, concentric, and eccentric muscle forces of the arm-
shoulder complex. The distances of travel and velocities were expressed
relative to arm length. The subjects were 18 men whose ages ranged from
18 to 30 years. "For fairly rapid movements (corresponding to 607o of the |
arm length per second) the maximal concentric force is 75 to 807o of maximal I
isometric strength. In resisting a movement of the same velocity, 125 to
1307o of the maximal isometric strength can be produced. The concentric
and eccentric strength curves at all movement velocities studied were prac-
tically parallel to the isometric strength curves with the exception of
the first part of the movement in concentric contraction. The authors report-
ed a correlation of 0.80 between dynamic strength (at a velocity of 15%
arm length per second) and isometric strength.
Y
In a well-planned study, Carlson (1970) studied the relationship *
between isometric and isotonic strength of the right elbow flexor muscles.
Carlson found the mean isometric strength value to be 78.1 lbs. and the
mean isotonic strength value to be 68.3 lbs., resulting in a difference
of 137o. The correlation coefficient between isotonic and isometric strength
was found to be 0.83. The author concluded.
...that the difference between the two tests is highly
significant. The validity of the substitution of a test of " t
isometric strength, therefore, is contingent upon the use
of test results. If the purpose of the test is to discrimi-
nate between strong and weak persons, the substitution is
a valid one. If the purpose of the test is to determine
the level of muscular strength, however, the substitution
is not valid because of the differences between results of
the two tests.
VII -4
I'
UlllMlillllllMIll&IilliiL
Berger and Higginbotham (1970) studied the relationship between sta-
tic and dynamic strength of the knee flexors at the joint angles of 35 ,
61° , 89 ° , 135° , and 167°. The following table summarizes the results of
the strength testing as reported by Berger and Higginbotham:
TABLE 1
STATIC AND DYNAMIC STRENGTH OF KNEE PLEXORS
Knee Angle
Static Strength X
Dynamic Strengt
h X
r
35°
415 lbs.
275 lbs.
.79
61°
339 lbs.
329 lbs.
.96
89°
490 lbs.
489 lbs.
.99
135°
974 lbs.
966 lbs.
.99
167°
1050 lbs.
1045 lbs.
.99
I'
The correlations between static and dynamic strength of the knee flexors
as reported by Berger and Higginbotham are the highest reported relation-
ships found in the literature.
Using a two-hand crank ergometer, Kogi, Mueller and Rohmert (1965) .if
related the isometric moments of rotation at 12 different crank positions
to dynamic force measurements performed for 30 minutes at 60 revolutions
per minute at differing outputs. The results are depicted in Figure 1.
The dashed line illustrates the maximum static strength that the sub-
jects were able to exert at 30 degree intervals from through 330° (0 ,
30° , ...330° ) on the crank ergometer. The solid line illustrates the
dynamic moment of rotation (at 2, 7, ...37 kpm/sec) at the same hand posi-
tions as the static measurements. It is interesting to note that although
the dynamic measurements do not reach the same magnitude as the static ]'
measurements, the force measurement curves demonstrate remarkably similar
profiles.
In summary, the authors found that (1) the nature of the dynamic
curve remains essentially unchanged with an increase in output, (2) the
curves possess two maximum points, i.e., at positions 90 and 270 , (3)
the exertion of strength was always greater with pulling than it was with
pushing, and (4) strength curves at high dynamic outputs approach (but
never attain) the maximum isometric strength. ^
Stothart (1970) examined the relationship between specific charac-
teristics of static elbow flexion performance and biomechanical aspects
of dynamic elbow flexion performance under each of three different loads.
For the three dynamic test conditions, A (minimum load), B (twice the mini-
mum load), and C (three times the minimum load), the maximum dynamic torque
means were 51.4%, 60.9%, and 66.8% of the maximum static torque means,
respectively. Stothart reported the following correlations between maximum ^^
static torque and selected dynamic variables: '^
VII -5
llIUlMMliMIMliliMliiiilil
1 1
Q.
«o N. <o lo 5J- ro
w
C
60
)^
0)
PQ
>^
.Q
T3
(U
■U
U
O
&
(U
>-<
to
M
C
•H
i->
CO
0)
XI o
4J r~
C H
a) ^^
4-1 e
CD CO
O 4-1
-H O
CO C
C -H
>^ 60
T3 M
•H
•O EEi
C
cfl
(0
CO
o
3
CO
Pi
0)
3
bO
r
1
1'
k
l^
VII-6
]1 I 1 I M M S
Jl M 11 fi ][
A I 1 I 1 L
TABLE 2
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN STATIC AND DYNAMIC ELBOW FLEXION PERFORMANCE
Maximum Dynamic Torque
Dynamic Torque at 15
Dynamic Torque at 30
Dynamic Torque at 45
Dynamic Torque at 60
Dynamic Torque at 75
Dynamic Torque at 90
Dynamic Torque at 105
Condi-
Condi-
Condi-
tion A
tion B
tion C
.73
.71
.76
.70
.75
.73
.60
.66
.70
.47
.59
.58
.25
.45
.37
-.02
.19
.08
-.16
-.13
-.12
-.05
-.20
-.25
The above correlations between dynamic and static torque variables show
that the relationship pattern was moderate (r ^-70) during early phases
of the movement and dropped exponentially to negative values at the end
of the movement. Stothart concludes that static and dynamic force are mod-
erately related in early phases of movement where very little excursion
(movement) has occurred.
Summary of Major Findings
1. An intensive review of the literature indicates that the relation-
ship between static and dynamic muscular forces has not been definitely
established. Various evaluations of static and dynamic muscular force have
resulted in conflicting opinions about these relationships. The following
correlation table is a selected summary of those investigations that
have particular relevance to our problem. The correlation coefficients
shown are the reported relationships between static and dynamic strength.
1'
TABLE 3
A SELECTED SUMMARY TABLE OF REPORTED RELATIONSHIPS
BETWEEN STATIC AND DYNAMIC STRENGTH
Reference
Asmussen, Hansen, and Lammert (1965)
Berger and Henderson (1966)
Berger and Higginbotham (1970) (range)
Carlson (1970)
Lagasse (1970)
Martens and Sharkey (1966)
McClements (1966) (flexion strength and power)
(extension strength and power)
Rasch and Pierson (1963)
Stothart (1970) (range)
Corre-
lation
.80
.60
.79 to .99
.83
.47
.77
.52
.65
.69
.76 to -.25
k
r
VII-7
li 12 1 M
Mli£M£MK£ll£lIf£L
I i
The basic question to be answered in the application of these relation-
ships is with what degree of accuracy do we want to be able to predict
dynamic force from static force? Although the correlation between the two
measures may be relatively high (i.e., r=.83) the standard error of esti-
mate for predicting dynamic force from static force may be too large for
the regression equation to be of practical value; e.g., if the standard
error of estimate equals plus or minus 10 kiloponds from a regression mean
of 70 kiloponds the error percentage is of a magnitude of 147o.
2. Static muscular force (whether it is measured in linear or angular
motion) is usually larger than dynamic force. Dynamic force, depending
on the velocity of the shortening muscles, amounts to about 50% to 90% of
the maximal static force.
3. When dynamic force is expressed as a concentric contraction (muscles
shortening during the action) or as an eccentric contraction (muscles length-
ening during the action), the eccentric contraction yields the larger value.
4. Static and dynamic muscular forces are moderately related (r^.70)
in early phases of the movement where little excursion has occurred; how-
ever, this relationship drops exponentially to negative values at the end
of the movement.
5. It appears that dynamic force may be more accurately predicted from
static force measurements when the motion to be evaluated is angular rather
than linear.
Human Force Exertions Within the Arm Reach Envelope
of the Seated Subject
VII-8
I
1'
This portion of this chapter describes experiments designed to measure
the maximum static push forces that seated subjects can exert throughout
selected positions of the arm reach envelope. A total of 76 arm force exer-
tions were measured on a sample of 55 young male subjects whose mean age
was 21.3 years with a standard deviation of 3.2 years; mean weight was
75.1 kg (165.6 lbs) with a standard deviation of 14.0 kg (30.9 lbs);
mean stature was 176.9 cm (69.6 in) with a standard deviation of 5.6 cm
(2.2 in). Because this material has not been previously published, we will
discuss the equipment used and the experimental protocol in more detail " t
than was done in other previously reported studies. The equipment used
for this experiment consisted mainly of a seat, a three-dimensional strain
gauge force transducer, and two pieces of recording equipment (See Figure 2).
The seat, complete with belts, simulated a standard aircraft seat
with hard surfaces replacing the usual seat cushions. It was constructed
in such a way that the seat back angle could be changed to any given angle
currently used or considered for use in USAF aircraft. Built on a track,
the movable seat could be brought forward and backward and left and right ^
in relation to the handle assembly. The handle assembly was constructed
in such a way that it could be raised or lowered, making it possible to
lillflMMfilJiliiiiLi^aiLilli;.
Adjustable
vertical
frame
V
V
Figure 2. Equipment for measurement of maximum static push forces of
seated subject.
VI 1-9
k
I'
lilllMMliMii
Klllllllli
i i
locate the handle at any desired spatial location with respect to seat
reference point (SRP).*
The handle used in measuring arm forces consisted of an aluminum
cylinder with a diameter of 3.8 cm (1.5 in) and a length of 12 cm (4.7 i
in). Knurled to minimize slippage when grasped, the handle was attached =^
to a Lebow three-dimensional strain gauge force transducer. Inside the
transducer were three pairs of strain gauges arranged perpendicularly to
each other, operating on the Wheatstone bridge arrangement. When a force
was exerted on the handle, the balance between the three pairs of strain
gauges was altered accordingly. The range of the transducer in any of the
three coordinates was 135 kiloponds. However, to simplify data-reporting
in this chapter, we have chosen to present only the push force in a hori-
zontal plane in the forward direction. ^
Location of the Handle Assembly in Relation to Seat Reference Point
The spatial locations of the handle assembly (See Figure 2) for the
arm force exertions were selected from an analysis of unpublished arm reach
data gathered by Kenneth W. Kennedy, Aerospace Medical Research Laborator-
ies, Wright -Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. These test positions were estab-
lished using the fifth percentile arm reach envelopes of the USAF population -X'
for each of the three different seat back angles (13°, 25°, and 65°) estab-
lished for this research.
The final test positions for the arm exertions numbered 76 and included
34 exertions with a seat back angle of 13°, 27 exertions with a seat back
angle of 25° , and 15 exertions with a seat back angle of 65°. The exact
locations of the 76 final test positions with respect to seat reference
point and seat centerline are listed in Tables 4, 5 and 6.
Procedure
The subject sat in the seat, restrained by a regular lap belt, grasp-
ing the handle assembly during the arm force exertions. His feet were re-
quired to rest "on the deck" during the arm exertions. The subject was
not allowed to grasp the chair with his free hand during the exertion.
The general testing instructions for the static muscular strength
evaluation of each subject followed, in general, the procedures and tech-
niques reported by Caldwell et al . , 1974. From the record of each arm
force exertion, the largest amplitude ("peak") value was read; these are
the values reported here.
VII-10
1'
k
*Seat reference point (SRP) is the point of intersection of the midline of the L
seat pan with the midline of the seat back.
UIlIMMIIMiliKl^iiilf
Data Presentation
We have chosen to present the descriptive statistical data generated
from this study in a series of 20 illustrations (Figures 3 through 22).
Eight of these illustrations represent arm strength data within the reach '■•
envelope of the seated subject at a seat back angle of 13°; seven illustra-
tions present data at the 25° seat back angle; and the remaining five illu-
strations give data for the 65° seat back angle. These illustrations show
the summary statistics, including the mean, standard deviation, and fifth
and ninety-fifth percentiles, for a specific seat back angle and handle
assembly location in relation to seat reference point and seat centerline.
Tables 4, 5 and 6 give the exact location of the handle assembly in rela-
tion to seat reference point and seat centerline, as well as listing statis-
tical data for the arm force exertions in tabular form. f
Effects of Seat Back Angle Upon the Magnitude of Arm Torces
When the position of the seat back angle of the simulated aircraft
seat was positioned at 13^, maximal strength scores seemed to be obtained
when the handle assembly was located 76 to 89 centimeters above seat refer-
ence point from 13 to 26 centimeters left or right of seat reference
point, and from 55 to 65 centimeters forward of seat reference point. The
lowest strength values obtained in this position occurred when the handle
assembly was located from 38 to 51 centimeters above seat reference point.
r
r
In general, the largest arm strength values obtained when the seat
back angle was positioned at 25° occurred when the handle assembly was
located 76 to 89 centimeters above seat reference point, from 13 to 25
centimeters left or right of seat reference point, and 40 to 50 centimeters
forward of seat reference point.
When arm force exertions were measured at the 65 seat back angle,
the greatest strength scores occurred when the handle assembly was located
from 64 to 76 centimeters above seat reference point, and from 15 to 25
centimeters forward of seat reference point.
These strength data used in conjunction with existing data pertaining
to human force exertions for the seated operator (Laubach, Kroemer, and
Thordsen, 1972; Thordsen, Kroemer, and Laubach, 1972; and Kroemer, 1975) " fe
and the standing operator (Rohmert, 1966; and Rohmert and Jenik, 1971)
should aid the design engineer in the selection and arrangement of con-
trols that must be located within the arm reach of the seated and standing
operator.
Comparative Muscular Strength of Men and Women
This section will draw heavily upon two recently published articles \^
by Laubach (1976, a and b) . The latter report presents detailed, statistical
information on comparative muscular strength parameters of men and women
VII-11
UIllMMlifiliilJlIi^MIlllfl
1 1
TABLE I*
13 SEAT BACK ANGLE
LOCATION OF THE HANDLE ASSEMBLY IN RELATION TO SEAT
REFERENCE POINT AND SEAT CENTERLINE*
Arm Force
Exertions
Above
Forward
Le
ft
Right
Centerllne
(Kp)
SRP
of
46
SRP
cm
of
25
SRP
cm
of SRP
of Seat
Mean
33.7
S.D.
8.3
57.1 le
19.6
957.ile
38 cm
46.9
38 cm
48
cm
X
31.4
8.7
18.9
47.5
38 cm
48
cm
13 cm
35.5
10.5
21.6
56.2
38 cm
41
cm
38 cm
30.7
7.8
18.2
44.2
38 cm
30
cm
51 cm
25.3
6.8
15.0
37.3
51 cm
41
cm
51 cm
32.1
8.4
20.1
48.3
51 cm
51
cm
25 cm
43.1
11.0
27.3
63.6
51 cm
51
cm
13 cm
42.6
11.5
25.5
63.4
51 cm
53
cm
X
36.5
10.2
22.3
56.8
51 cm
51
cm
13
cm
44.3
11.3
24.9
61.8
64 cm
58
cm
25
cm
60.2
15.1
34.3
83.4
64 cm
69
cm
X
48.5
11.2
28.3
62.2
64 cm
58
cm
38 cm
54.5
16.2
31.4
86.4
64 cm
38
cm
64 cm
29.5
8.8
18.3
46.9
76 cm
53
cm
51 t-
46.3
14.9
23.2
73.8
76 cm
64
cm
25 cm
68.2
18.2
37.4
99.5
76 cm
64
cm
X
60.0
14.2
34.2
81.7
76 cm
58
cm
13
cm
65.5
16.4
39.7
95.0
76 cm
25
cm
38
cm
37.1
9.4
23.4
53.9
89 cm
46
cm
25
cm
52.2
15.1
28.9
77.9
89 cm
61
cm
X
67.6
16.7
40.8
95,6
89 cm
61
cm
13 cm
73.9
18.2
48.4
106.0
89 cm
56
cm
38 cm
66.5
19.6
33.2
100.5
89 cm
8
cm
76 cm
17.0
4.7
10.4
26.2
102 cm
25
cm
64 cm
26.2
7.2
15.5
39.6
102 cm
53
cm
25 cm
72.2
19.3
43.9
106.1
102 cm
51
cm
X
51.6
15.3
31.4
79.7
102 cm
48
cm
13
cm
52.5
17.5
29.6
85.1
114 cm
30
cm
13
cm
30.1
9.2
16.2
46.4
114 cm
38
cm
X
32.1
9.4
19.0
50.7
114 cm
20
cm
51 cm
28.4
6.5
19.7
40.4
127 cm
36
cm
13 cm
38.6
9.4
19.5
51.3
127 cm
33
cm
X
31.3
9.7
18.7
50.1
127 cm
25
cm
25
cm
32.5
8,4
20.6
48.0
\
\
1'
\
*The orientation of the handle was always vertical and the requested direction of the exertion
was in a horizontal plane in the forward direction.
VII-12
I'
lillllMMlifiMillllLIllIlIlL
TABLE 5
25° SEAT BACK ANGLE
LOCATION OF THE HANDLE ASSEMBLY IN RELATION TO SEAT
REFERENCE POINT AND SEAT CENTERLINE'^-
V
Arm Force Exertions
Above
Forward
Left
Right
Centerllne
(Kp)
SRE
of
38
SRP
cm
of SRP
25 cm
of SRP
of Seat
Mean
35.6
S.D.
10.3
57.il e
19.2
95'>iile
38 cm
53.4
38 cm
43
cm
X
31.4
9.6
17.6
48.8
38 cm
41
cm
25
cm
36.1
10.9
21.7
59.5
51 cm
20
cm
64
cm
23.4
7.0
13.0
36.4
51 cm
38
cm
38
cm
41.7
12.7
24.9
66.1
51 cm
43
cm
13
cm
47.4
13.6
27.5
70.6
51 cm
46
cm
25
cm
48.3
13.6
28.8
71.9
64 cm
25
cm
38
cm
39.8
10.9
24.7
61.1
6A cm
56
cm
13
cm
54.8
14.0
33.1
81.6
64 cm
56
cm
X
49.4
11.1
32.6
66.3
64 cm
51
cm
25
cm
61.3
16.1
34.9
86.8
64 cm
38
cm
51
cm
40.8
11.9
23.6
60.3
76 cm
25
cm
64
cm
29.4
8.2
16.9
43.8
76 cm
46
cm
38
cm
59.6
17.9
37.2
90.2
76 cm
48
cm
X
64.1
15.1
J6.9
87.7
76 cm
43
cm
25
cm
71.0
18.6
42.5
102.1
89 cm
46
cm
13
cm
71.3
21.8
34.6
110.4
89 cm
48
cm
X
69.6
18.0
39.7
100.5
89 cm
51
cm
25
cm
75.0
19.1
44.4
107.6
89 cm
41
cm
51
cm
50.2
17.6
25.9
83.3
102 cm
5
cm
64
cm
23.0
5.8
15.0
3:'.7
102 cm
41
cm
13
cm
66.2
20.9
36.1
97.8
102 cm
38
cm
X
52.9
16.5
31.1
85.4
102 cm
23
cm
25
cm
40.9
10.8
25.2
61.1
114 cm
13
cm
13
cm
30.5
10.4
16.2
49.0
114 cm
25
cm
25
cm
46.2
13.5
24.6
69.0
114 cm
20
cm
38
cm
40.3
11.3
23.2
60.0
F
r
*The orientation of the handle was always vertical and the requested direction of the
exertion was in a horizontal plane in the forward direction.
k
VII-13
I'
11 fi 1 1
Ull&lilllllilli
TABLE 6
65° SEAT BACK ANGLE
LOCATION OF THE HANDLE ASSEMBLY IN RELATION TO SEAT
REFERENCE POINT AND SEAT CENTERLINE*
Arm Fo
rce
Exertions
Above
Forward
Left
Right
Centerline
(Kp)
SRP
of
15
SRP
cm
of :
SRP
of SRP
51 cm
of Seat
Mean
27.8
S.D.
9.3
57.ile
15.7
95%ile
38 cm
43.5
38 cm
15
cm
38 cm
37.0
11.3
19.5
54.6
51 cm
15
cm
25
cm
49.7
15.2
20.9
72.3
51 cm
30
cm
X
35.9
10.0
20.8
53.8
51 cm
13
cm
64 cm
23.3
8,3
11.8
39.3
64 cm
5
cm
64 cm
24.6
7.6
14.2
49.3
64 cm
28
cm
25 cm
54.5
15.2
32.9
82.1
64 cm
28
cm
X
49.3
12.6
30.4
66.5
64 cm
20
cm
13
cm
61.7
16.4
35.3
88.8
76 cm
3
cm
25
cm
49.8
18.1
24.1
84.2
76 cm
18
cm
X
57.1
16.0
30.4
81.5
76 cm
20
cm
13 cm
63.8
16.4
38.1
87.8
76 cm
8
cm
51 cm
32.7
9.9
18.4
49.8
89 cm
3
cm
X
40.2
15.9
17.9
69.7
89 cm
3
cm
25 cm
50.6
18.3
25.9
81.0
*The orientation of the handles was always vertical and the requested direction of the
exertion was In a lK>ritontal plane in the forward direction.
VII- 14
I t
t
I
V
k
Y
lillKMISlMUMIiftillfl^
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle' at 38 cm above SRP
\ i
Forward 46 cm
Left 25 cm
Forward 48 on
Centerline
60 40 20
?
Il l '
60 40 20
20 40
Forward 48 cm
Right 13 cm
X =
SD =
5%Ue =
95%ile =
do '6(5 '4!)
Io\i '64'8'0
Forward 41 cm ^75
Right 38 cm
r
Forward 30 cm -n
Right 51 cm
l^^T"
k
Figure 3. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
r
VII-15
IlfillMJiMMMMMfilltMifilli-
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 51 cm above SRP
I i
Forwarc
1 41 cm
Right
51 cm
X
= 32.1
SD
= 8.4
5%11e
= 20.1
95%11e
= 48.3
to'4'0
'P»
20
Forward 51 cm
Right 25 cm
X= 43.1
SD = 11.0
5%ile = 27.3
95%ile = 63.6
till
60 40 20
-|75
?
20 40
Forward 51 cm
Right 13 cm
X = 42.6
SD = 11.5
5%ile = 25.5
95%ile = 63.4
do' (SoM ■
' 4o ' 4o ' 80
I
Forward 53 cm
Centerline
1-75
rill
60 40 20
I I I I
40 60
75-
t
Forward 51 cm
Left 13 cm
X = 44.3
SD = 11.3
5%11e = 24.9
95Xile = 61.8
rr
60
"1 1
40
20'^^
^ 1 II 1 II
20 40 60
Figure 4. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
r
I'
VII-16
lilllXUfiEJlMli&Millllifi
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 64 cm above SRP
75r Forward 58 cm
left 25 cm
X = 60.2
SD = 15.1
5%ile = 34.3
95%ile = 83.4
T
Forward 58 cm _ 75
Right 38 cm
X = 54.5
SD = 16.2
5%ile = 31.4
95%ile = 86.4
I I I I 1 I I I SI^P I i I I
80 60 40 20 20 40
"T
60
T-l
80
1 I \
60 80
Forward 69
Centerline
X = 48.5
SD = 11.2
5%ile = 28.3
95%ile = 62.2
I I I I I
80 60 40
r
20 ^^^ 20
r I I I I I I
40 60 80
Forward 38 cm
Right 64 cm
X= 29.5
SD = 8.8
5%ile = 18.3
95%ile = 46.9
"|75
50
1'
b
Figure 5. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds).
I'
VII-17
]i I I I H M M
M£M££llMifiI£
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 76 cm above SRP
Forward 53 cm
Right 51 cm
y ■ 46.3
SD -
5%11e -
95*11 e ■
Eo^
Forward 64 cm ^75
Right 25 cm
X - 68.2
SO - 18.2
5!i;ile - 37.4
95X1 le ■ 99.5
j?ir^
f
Forward 64
Centerllne
X ■
SD >
5%11e ■
95%11e ■
io'eb'A'
J f I I I I I I
^0 40 60 80
1
ETJT'
r Forward 58 cm
Left 13 cm
J ' 65.5
SD - 16.4
5%ne - 39.7
95%11e ■ 95.0
ITlo
75-, Forward 25 cm
Left 38 cm
I I n
20 40 60
k
Figure 6. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds).
VII-18
I'
UllIMMlilMliMIttfilllllk
I i
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 89 cm above SRP
75
50
Forward 46 cm
Left 25 cm
X= 52.2
SO = 15.1
5%ile = 28.9
95%ile = 77.9
60 40
I I I I
40 60
Forward 61
Centerline
X= 67.6
SO = 16.7
5%ile = 40.8
95%11e = 95.6
60 4C
V
I I I I
20 40 60
Forward 8 cm -,75
Right 76 cm
X = 17.0
SD = 4.7 -PO
5%ile = 10.4
95%ile = 26.2
-25
1'
Forward 61 cm
Right 13 cm
X= 73.9
SD = 18.2
5%ile = 48.4
95%ile = 106.0
«0'4b ' Yo
^m
Forward 56 cm -|75
Right 38 cm
X= 66.5
SD = 19.6
5%ile = 33.2
95%ile = 100.5
I
f i l l
20 40 60
Figure 7. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline Cvalues in kiloponds).
I'
VII-19
UllIIMSfiMMllIIltlliflL
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 102 cm above SRP
Forward 25 cm
Right 64 cm
X = 26.2
SD = 7.2
5%ile = 15.5
95%ile = 39.6
•-75
-50
-|75
Forward 51
Centerline
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%11e =
Forward 53 cm
Right 25 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
I I I I I I I ISRP
80 60 40 20 20
f
I I I I I
40 60 80
1
'4'0 Vo'si
I I I I I I
80 60 40 20
Forward 48 cm
Left 13 cm
X = 52.5
SD = 17.5
5%ile = 29.6
95%ile = 85.1
I I I I I I I
26 40 60 80
1'
Figure 8. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to the
seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds).
¥
vii-20
]i B I I
UfilMMlilLllllMl
III
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 114 cm above SRP
75i- Forward 30 cm
Left 13 cm
I I I I I I
80 60 40 20
rnn
60 80
V
Forward 38 cm
Centerline
p75
X = 32.1
SD = 9.4f
5%ile = 19.0i
95%ile = 50.7
-50
1 1 1 1 f f?f
60 40 20
'^' 20
1 1 1 1
40 60
20 cm -|75
51 cm
t'
Y
I I I I
20 40 60
Figure 9. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to
the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in klloponds).
k
r
VII-21
U I S li
il^Killllllllli
13 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 127 cm above SRP
Forward 36 cm -|75
Right 13 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
I I I r I I 1 icRp
80 60 40 20 ^'^^
f
1 I I rn^
20 40 60 80
Forward 33 cm
r75
Centerline
X = 31.3
SD = 9.7i
5%ile = 18.71
_50
95%ile = 50. 1<
m
III! T Tsf
60 40 20 ^^
'' ' 20 ' 40
1 1
60
75-1
50-
Forward
25 cm
Left
25 cm
X
= 32.5
SD
= 8.4
5X116
= 20.6
95«ile
= 48.0
I
1'
40 60
Figure 10. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to
the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
\
X.
VII-22
liflllMMMEMiiiiKM
& i I I I i
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 38 cm above SRP
V
75|- Forward 38 cm
Left 25 cm
I I I I I I I ISRP ^„
80 60 40 20 ^ 20
r
60 80
75-1
S?1P"
Forward 43 cm
Centerl
me
X
= 31.4
SD
= 9.6
5%ile
= 17.6
95«ile
= 48.8
! 1
•0 40
60
Forward 41 cm n75
Right 25 cm
X= 36.1
SD = 10.9
5%ile =21.7
95%ile = 59.5
I I I I
60 40 20
r
SRP
I I I I
20 40 60
Figure 11. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative to
the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
I
I'
VII-23
IllllMHlilM
lllLillllll
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 51 cm above SRP
Forward 20 cm
Right 64 cm
X =
SD =
5%11e =
95%ile =
k'eb'Vo'
t I I
60 80
Forward 43 cm
Right 13 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
1-75
I I I I I I I I SRP
iO 60 40 20 ^^*^
I I I I i I
20 40 60 80
Forward 38 cm
Right • 38 cm
X= 41.7
SD = 12.7
5%ile = 24.9
95%ile = 66.1
I I r 1 I
80 60 40
I I I I I I
20 40 60 80
Forward 46 cm
Left 25 cm
I I I I I I
80 60
f
Y
I
Figure 12. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat center line Cvalues in kiloponds) .
VII-24
I'
U 1 1 ]|
HilLllL^ll
U I I f £
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 64 cm above SRP
75-1
Forward 25 cm
Left 38 cm
I I I I
40 60
I I I I
60 40 20
Forward 56 cm
Left 13 cm
X= 54.8
SD = 14.0
5«ile = 33.1
95«ile = 81.6
40 60
f
Forward 56 cm
Centerlire
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
80 60 40 20 ^"^^
20
I I I I I
40 60 80
I
Forward 51 cm —75
Right 25 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95«ile =
>0 40 20
I I I I
20 40 60
Forward 38 cm
Right 51 cm
I I I I
60 40 20
r
I
Figure 13. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds).
I'
VII-25
U I 1 I 1 1
1 1 I M I li
£1111
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 76 cm above SRP
Forward 25 cm
Right 64 cm
X =
SD =
5«11e =
95%1le =
I I I I I I
80 60 40
V
I I I I I I
20 40 60 80
Forward 46 cm
Right 38 cm
X" =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
r75
Forward 48
Centerline
r75
r
80 60
I I I I I I
60 80
If
r I I I I I
80 60 40 20
I I I I I I
20 40 60 80
I I I I I I
80 60 40
Forward 43 an
Left 25 an
= 71.0
= 18.6
= 42.5
= 102.1
Wo' i0'8b
Y
I
Figure 14. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
VII-26
Y
U I 1 1 M 1 li
I 1 ][ I IL
I i I I i k
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 89 cm above SRP
V
I I I I r I
80 60 40
Forward
46 cm
Left
13 cm
X
= 71.3
SD
= 21.8
5%1le
= 34.6
95%ne
= no.4
I I I I I I
40 60 80
Forward 51 cm
Right 25 cm
SD =
5%ne =
95%ne «
r I I I I I
80 60 40
1-75
)0 60
lo
75-1
Forward 48 cm
t
Centerllne
50t
X- 69.6
Ss
SD - 18.0
\
\ 5%1le = 39.7
25;
>
0^5%11e = 100.5
1 f § >D
rr 1 1 1 1 1 "1
20
20 40 60 80
r
V
I 1 1 1 1 1
40 60 80
Y
T—Tt
20 40 60
80
Figure 15. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
Y
VII-27
liiUllLillL^illlllllll
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 102 cm above SRP
Forward 5 cm |-75
Right 64 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
80 60
Forward 41 cm-t 75
Right 13 cm
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
Forward 38 cm
Center! ine -,75
X =
SD =
5%ile =
95%ile =
I I I I I I
80 60 40
I I I I I I
80 60 40
20 ' 4*0 ' ^0 ' si
I I I I I
40 60 80
75'
50-
25-
Forward 23 cm
Left 25 cm
X
SD
5%ile
95%ile
40.9
10.8
25.2
61.1
80 60 40 20 ^'^^
20
I I I I I I
40 60 80
Figure 16. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds).
ir
VII-28
U 1 I 1
IL^liJLllllllllli
25 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 114 cm above SRP
Forward 13 cm i-75
Left 13 cm
X =
SD =
5%11e =
95%11e =
I I I r I I
80 60 40 20
20
I I I I i
40 60 80
Forward 25 cm
Right 25 cm
X =
SD =
5X116 =
95!i;ile =
I I I I
60 40 20
r75
I I I I
20 40 60
1
Forward 20 cm
r75
Right 38 cm
X = 40.3
-50
SD = 11.3
5%ile = 23.2
95*ile = 60.0
-25
t
1 1 1 1 'f 'rl'
in I I
III
1'
60 40
20
20 40 60
Figure 17. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations relative
to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values in kiloponds) .
k
I'
VII-29
IIIIIMMSIM
illMfillfilll
65 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 38 cm above SRP
V
Forward 15 cm
Right 51 cm
X = 27.8
SD = 9.3
5%ile = 15.7
95%ile = 43.5
I I I I I I I I cnp
80 60 40 20
r I I I I I
20 40 60 80
Forward
Right
15
38
cm
cm
X = 37.0
SD = 11.3
5%ile =19.5
95r,ile = 54.6
I I I I I I
80 60 40
r 75
-50
1'
20 ^^^ 20
60 80
Figure 18. Force exerted on handle assembly at various locations
relative to the seat reference point and seat centerline (values
in kiloponds) .
Y
VII-30
]|BllMMM£ll££IiittM81I£^
65 Degree Seat Back Angle
Handle at 51 cm above SRP
For>*ard 15 cm 
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11